Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "The Hill"
channel.
-
39
-
38
-
33
-
29
-
24
-
21
-
18
-
17
-
10
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@jdlambo6926 Who and/or What Am I? Do 'I' even exist? (copy and paste from my files):
Consider the following:
a. I am a human as defined by humans.
b. I am an energy based quarkelectronian as modern science claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy and I am made up of matter and interacting energy.
c. I am a being of 'light', 'if' my current theory of everything is correct whereby the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in this universe, including space, time and numbers. (Currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test).
d. "I" do not even actually exist but eternally existent space time exists as me, currently in the forms as above.
* I exist and yet "I" simultaneously do not exist, dependent upon perspective. But yet, do "I" not truly exist in absolute truth reality as only eternally existent space time exists as all things in absolute truth reality?
* "I" can mentally change between perspectives thereby experiencing existence from those various perspectives. "My" mind continues to expand, but is it truly 'my' mind that is expanding or is it eternally existent space time's mind that is expanding? In absolute truth reality, it would seem to be the later.
* 'To Be or Not To Be'. I am both, 'I Am and I Am Not.' But I Am Not it appears more than I Am.
* Consider also: If asked the general question, 'What do you know?'. My current answer would be, 'Not much compared to all that can be known.' (I Am Not, More than I Am). It's humbling.
* Is it truly any wonder that the flow of energy in the universe affects species? We are the universe experiencing itself.
* Question: If 'I' never actually existed in the first place, how could 'I' ever die?
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
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. 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". Instead of what is claimed "God created 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. It has also been scientifically proven that the brain makes up stuff to 'fill in the blanks' of it's perceived reality. Technology is often needed to perceive items that are outside of the human senses' capabilities. 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. Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) even believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
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.
* For those who claim God actually exists besides just as a concept, please prove that 'b' above is really true and that 'a' is not really true.
3
-
3
-
@bonnielee316 Well, the following is showing how 'God' does not actually exist except for as a concept alone, but it also works for a 'Pre-Existent Consciousness' as well:
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. 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". 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. It has also been scientifically proven that the brain makes up stuff to 'fill in the blanks' of it's perceived reality. Technology is often needed to perceive items that are outside of the human senses' capabilities. 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. Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) even believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
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.
* For those who claim God actually exists besides just as a concept, please prove that 'b' above is really true and that 'a' is not really true.
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Consider also, the US Fed has a target of 2% inflation every year. But that is also 2% on top of all the 2%'s that came before it, which turns out to be a lot of inflation over time.
Now first, if people's wages, benefits and even saving's account interest do not keep up with the true cost of inflation, they fall behind in buying power, and zero income is still zero income. But with economic inflation people would have a higher economic mountain to climb. They eventually could become economic slaves to the larger economy. And slavery was supposed to be done away with at least here in the USA. It seems it has been replaced by a system of 'economic slavery'. As America gets greater, a US Dollar should be able to buy more, not less.
Second, space travel, the ONLY thing that might save any species from this Earth, has gotten more expensive just in my lifetime. What is space travel going to cost in the next 100, 1000, 1 million years from now? Economic inflation just might be a contributing factor to the demise of all life from this planet Earth. And we did it to ourselves. Or more correctly the US Fed did it to us all, including themselves.
Instead of talk like doing away with the penny, they should actually be trying to bring back and maintain the value of the penny. And then have a target of 0% inflation annually. Otherwise, we all eventually die one day from something and go extinct, which is probably going to occur anyway, but without economic inflation, we would have a better chance of surviving. With economic inflation, less so.
What good is life if there is no entity left to live it? What good is money if there are no entities left to spend it?
Survive beyond this Earth, solar system and collapsing spiral shaped galaxy, OR die and go extinct. Those are the choices, (if we even actually have a choice). Currently, no exceptions.
* Everybody needs to become active in changing the US Fed's economic inflation policy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Questions: The USPS is taking pictures of everybody's letter sized mail pieces, to offer a 'free' service to those who want to know via email what is coming to them in the mail and when it will be there: BUT...............
a. The USPS (and the rest of the US Government via the Patriot Act), would now also have an email address attached to a real address.
b. But a question is: Are those photos making their way to the NSA? A lot can be learned from what mail one is sending, receiving, to whom, how often, etc, without even opening the item. (And of course, they probably at times open items as well).
c. And another question: If the USPS is so hard up on cash, then why are they offering this 'free' service? Surely it must cost real money to take, store and send out via email all those photos.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AnExtraterrestrial JFK: CONSIDER THIS THEORY THAT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT:
a. Hasn't it been said that JFK was the first Catholic US President? And if not the first, certainly still a Catholic President.
b. That would put the Pope in Rome having influence over a sitting US President, a President over the most powerful nation on this Earth.
c. Those, possibly even in COG, could not take out a Pope, because Catholics would just put in another Pope. COG's only solution to solve the issue would be to take out JFK.
d. BUT, 'if' true, and this came out in public, that COG took out a sitting US President because the President was Catholic, and COG wanted to break the influence of the Pope over the President and USA, and therefore also over the world, with so many Catholics still active in the USA, as well as in the rest of the world, could trigger an uprising in the USA and in the world. Could possibly also lead to the knowledge that God does not actually exist except for just as a concept alone, which could possibly trigger other issues in the USA and the world. Also might lead to the knowledge then that life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things, because if species don't get off of this Earth one day, they all will eventually die and go extinct.
e. Hasn't it been said that Biden is the second Catholic US President? And if not the second, certainly still a Catholic President. A Catholic President who has already been to Rome to see the Pope, of which, soon after that meeting, certain Catholics met to decide how to handle Catholic leaders of nations and other important influencers who support abortion and whether those leaders and influencers could still take holy communion. In other words, even today, the Pope and other Catholics are still trying to have influence over a US President and other world leaders and influencers in this world. The Pope even being able to get certain people on the Supreme Court here in the USA to have more influence over the USA and the world.
f. It's all about power and control people, with the Pope being behind the power and control over the world's nations, which then would put him in power and control over the world's population. Sound like 'Satan' much?
g. This theory even makes more sense than taking out JFK to prevent WW3 or to prevent the release of any UFO technologies, or to prolong the war in Vietnam, and would certainly be a reason to keep the final JFK documents hidden even today.
* Otherwise, why is the US Government still keeping secret the final JFK documents? What exactly is the US Government still hiding that they don't want the public to know?
1
-
Consider my own analysis as well shown below: (Plus, to add to your opening comment: Where are all the other 'UFO's and Aliens' found in other nations on this Earth? Why only the USA? Leads one to believe the USA is trying to pull a fast one over the population.)
FOR TRUTH SEEKERS:
ALIENS AND UFO'S: (copy and paste from my files):
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth.
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
@javierrodriguez2863 Are we all basically 'Reptilians'? Consider this post of mine concerning where thoughts come from:
THOUGHT ABOUT THOUGHTS: (copy and paste from my files):
Question: Where do thoughts actually come from?
For example: Modern science claims that we have billions of brain cells with trillions of brain cell connections. How exactly does the energy signal 'know' where and when to start, what path to take, and where and when to stop to form a single coherent thought?
An analogy I utilize is to spread a brain out like a map. Brain cells are represented by towns and cities, brain cell interconnections are represented by roads and highways, and the energy signal is represented by a vehicle traveling between one or more towns and/or cities. A coherent thought is a coherent trip.
How exactly does the vehicle 'know' where and when to start, what path to take, and where and when to stop to form a single coherent trip? A higher intelligence has to tell it those things. But, that is a coherent 'trip' (thought) in and of itself.
So, how exactly does our brain think a thought before it consciously thinks that thought? And if thoughts can be thought without consciously thinking thoughts, then what do we need to consciously think thoughts for? Just to consciously think thoughts that are already thought? What then of 'freewill' if we don't even consciously think our own thoughts?
And then to further that situation, modern science claims that many different energy signals are starting at various places in the brain, take various pathways, and stop at different places, just to form a single coherent thought. (With the analogy, many vehicles are starting at various places on the map, taking various routes, and stopping at various places, all together forming a single coherent 'trip'.) And somehow it's all coordinated and can happen very quickly and very often.
So, where do thoughts actually come from? Who and/or what is thinking the thoughts before I consciously think those thoughts? Do "I" even have freewill to even think these thoughts "I" am thinking about thoughts and type these thoughts to you here on this internet?
Modern science also claims we have at least 3 brains: The early or reptilian brain, the mid brain, and the later more developed brain. So, are early parts of the brain thinking thoughts before the later parts of the brain consciously think those thoughts? If reptiles can think thoughts, then couldn't the early part of our brain think thoughts, and somehow pass those thoughts on to later more developed parts of later brains? Is our 'inner self' really just our reptilian brain thinking the thoughts that we think we are thinking? Are we all just later more evolved reptiles? Who don't even consciously think our own thoughts?
If not, then how exactly does the brain think thoughts? Where exactly do thoughts originally come from so our brain can consciously think those thoughts?
So "I" am thinking about thoughts, if it is even "I" thinking the thoughts that "I" believe "I" am thinking about thoughts. Or so "I" currently think, here again, if it is even "I" doing the thinking. "My" thinking is imploding as "I" think about thoughts. But then again, is it even 'me' that is imploding? I will have to think about it some more. Poof, I'm gone.
Is just energy interacting with itself the lowest form of sub-consciousness? Is it even consciousness itself?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mkhud50n Do my gravity test for my theory of everything, then let's talk again.
GRAVITY: (copy and paste from my files):
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. Direct 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, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.)
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 direct 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.
This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
* And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................)
But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions.
** Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be?
So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true?
(Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Consider also, the US Fed has a target of 2% inflation every year. But that is also 2% on top of all the 2%'s that came before it, which turns out to be a lot of inflation over time.
Now first, if people's wages, benefits and even saving's account interest do not keep up with the true cost of inflation, they fall behind in buying power, and zero income is still zero income. But with economic inflation people would have a higher economic mountain to climb. They eventually could become economic slaves to the larger economy. And slavery was supposed to be done away with at least here in the USA. It seems it has been replaced by a system of 'economic slavery'.
Second, space travel, the ONLY thing that might save any species from this Earth, has gotten more expensive just in my lifetime. What is space travel going to cost in the next 100, 1000, 1 million years from now? Economic inflation just might be a contributing factor to the demise of all life from this planet Earth. And we did it to ourselves. Or more correctly the US Fed did it to us all, including themselves.
Instead of talk like doing away with the penny, they should actually be trying to bring back and maintain the value of the penny. And then have a target of 0% inflation annually. Otherwise, we all eventually die one day from something and go extinct, which is probably going to occur anyway, but without economic inflation, we would have a better chance of surviving. With economic inflation, less so.
What good is life if there is no entity left to live it? What good is money if there are no entities left to spend it?
Survive beyond this Earth, solar system and galaxy, OR die and go extinct. Those are the choices, (if we even actually have a choice). Currently, no exceptions.
* Everybody needs to become active in changing the US Fed's economic inflation policy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Consider also, the US Fed has a target of 2% inflation every year. But that is also 2% on top of all the 2%'s that came before it, which turns out to be a lot of inflation over time.
Now first, if people's wages, benefits and even saving's account interest do not keep up with the true cost of inflation, they fall behind in buying power, and zero income is still zero income. But with economic inflation people would have a higher economic mountain to climb. They eventually could become economic slaves to the larger economy. And slavery was supposed to be done away with at least here in the USA. It seems it has been replaced by a system of 'economic slavery'.
Second, space travel, the ONLY thing that might save any species from this Earth, has gotten more expensive just in my lifetime. What is space travel going to cost in the next 100, 1000, 1 million years from now? Economic inflation just might be a contributing factor to the demise of all life from this planet Earth. And we did it to ourselves. Or more correctly the US Fed did it to us all, including themselves.
Instead of talk like doing away with the penny, they should actually be trying to bring back and maintain the value of the penny. And then have a target of 0% inflation annually. Otherwise, we all eventually die one day from something and go extinct, which is probably going to occur anyway, but without economic inflation, we would have a better chance of surviving. With economic inflation, less so.
What good is life if there is no entity left to live it? What good is money if there are no entities left to spend it?
Survive beyond this Earth, solar system and galaxy, OR die and go extinct. Those are the choices, (if we even actually have a choice). Currently, no exceptions.
* Everybody needs to become active in changing the US Fed's economic inflation policy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vegahimsa3057 I believe one has to honestly and sincerely answer the following enclosed questions:
(copy and paste from my files):
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
And whatever is decided and by whom, there might be entities who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist, which could be a source of animosity, which could lead to further violence and death.
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? How should we help take care of the young, old, ill and needy, if even at all? How would we want to receive help should we be individually young, old, ill and/or needy, if even at all? How should those be treated who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist? How should we treat others if we are being forced to exist how we do not want to exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? And where does the money and resources come from to do what we would like to do for how we would like to exist while we do exist?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
Then we all will still die in the end one day from something, we all will still forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and we all will still be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place, regardless of how we all existed while we existed. An entity truly exists throughout all of future eternity, or they don't. It appears we don't in actual reality, and as such, all of life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Death is freedom from life and eternal death awaits us all. Or so the current analysis would indicate.
Eternal Death 'IS' Eternal Peace. (OSICA)
(And note, those who cannot, or choose not to, face the above apparent reality, often delude themselves with fairy tales of alternatives).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
FOR TRUTH SEEKERS: ALIENS AND UFO'S:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless. Although then would have to possibly deal with cascading cosmic showers. Could possibly be worse behind the protection instead of having no protection.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth. (Although technically, since Earthling's have probes on Mars, all Earthlings are considered to be aliens.)
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Everybody, especially leaders of nations, need to ask and honestly answer the following enclosed questions in the following copy and paste from my files:
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
And whatever is decided and by whom, there might be entities who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist, which could be a source of animosity, which could lead to further violence and death.
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? How should we help take care of the young, old, ill and needy, if even at all? How would we want to receive help should we be individually young, old, ill and/or needy, if even at all? How should those be treated who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist? How should we treat others if we are being forced to exist how we do not want to exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? And where does the money and resources come from to do what we would like to do for how we would like to exist while we do exist?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
Then we all will still die in the end one day from something, we all will still forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and we all will still be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place, regardless of how we all existed while we existed. An entity truly exists throughout all of future eternity, or they don't. It appears we don't in actual reality, and as such, all of life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Death is freedom from life and eternal death awaits us all. Or so the current analysis would indicate.
Eternal Death 'IS' Eternal Peace. (OSICA)
(And note, those who cannot, or choose not to, face the above apparent reality, often delude themselves with fairy tales of alternatives).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
INTERDIMENSIONAL BEINGS: okay, you found 'me', or did 'you'?
Who and/or What Am I? Do 'I' even exist?
Consider the following:
a. I am a human as defined by humans.
b. I am an energy based quarkelectronian as modern science claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy and I am made up of matter and interacting energy.
c. I am a being of 'light', 'if' my current theory of everything is correct whereby the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in this universe, including space, time and numbers. (Currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test).
d. "I" do not even actually exist but eternally existent space time exists as me, currently in the forms as above.
* I exist and yet "I" simultaneously do not exist, dependent upon perspective. But yet, do "I" not truly exist in absolute truth reality as only eternally existent space time exists as all things in absolute truth reality?
* "I" can mentally change between perspectives thereby experiencing existence from those various perspectives. "My" mind continues to expand, but is it truly 'my' mind that is expanding or is it eternally existent space time's mind that is expanding? In absolute truth reality, it would seem to be the later.
* 'To Be or Not To Be'. I am both, 'I Am and I Am Not.' But I Am Not it appears more than I Am.
* Consider also: If asked the general question, 'What do you know?'. My current answer would be, 'Not much compared to all that can be known.' (I Am Not, More than I Am). It's humbling.
* Is it truly any wonder that the flow of energy in the universe affects species? We are the universe experiencing itself.
* Question: If 'I' never actually existed in the first place, how could 'I' ever die?
1
-
SPACE and TIME:
'Space' is energy itself. Wherever space is, energy is. Wherever energy is, space is. They are one and the same thing. And for me, the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe. 'Space' is most probably energy itself in the form of gravitational fields, electrical fields and magnetic fields, varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density (pressure) and energy frequency (temperature).
'Time' is the flow of energy.
'Time' (flow of energy) cannot exist unless 'space' (energy itself) exists. And 'space' (energy itself) that does not flow (no flow of time / energy) is basically useless. An entity cannot even think a thought without a flow of energy. If all the energy in the universe stopped flowing, wouldn't we say that 'time stood still'? Time itself would still exist, it would just not be flowing, (basically 'time' stopped).
But then also, how space and time are linked in what is called 'space time', (energy and it's flow).
* And everything in existence currently appears to be eternally existent energy interacting with itself. There is truly only 1 single 'eternal day', the day of eternally existent ever flowing energy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andyn333 You are not getting it though, why should a nation trade currency backed by something (even if it's the nation's reputation to stand by their own currency), with something that has no backing? For example also, money in a US bank is often backed by the FDIC. The FDIC does not back bitcoin currency.
And then also, you say the value of bitcoin drastically went up per coin. (Obviously potentially great as an investment), BUT that is also drastic inflation of bitcoin. (What it cost to buy 1 bitcoin let's say a year ago versus what it costs to buy 1 bitcoin today).
Of which also, what did 1 bitcoin buy let's say 1 year ago versus what 1 bitcoin buys today? If it cost more bitcoins to buy the same goods and/or services today versus 1 year ago, that would also be an increase in economic inflation. (And economic inflation is 'bad').
(copy and paste from my files):
Consider also, the US Fed has a target of 2% inflation every year. But that is also 2% on top of all the 2%'s that came before it, which turns out to be a lot of inflation over time.
Now first, if people's wages, benefits and even saving's account interest do not keep up with the true cost of inflation, they fall behind in buying power, and zero income is still zero income. But with economic inflation people would have a higher economic mountain to climb. They eventually could become economic slaves to the larger economy. And slavery was supposed to be done away with at least here in the USA. It seems it has been replaced by a system of 'economic slavery'.
Second, space travel, the ONLY thing that might save any species from this Earth, has gotten more expensive just in my lifetime. What is space travel going to cost in the next 100, 1000, 1 million years from now? Economic inflation just might be a contributing factor to the demise of all life from this planet Earth. And we did it to ourselves. Or more correctly the US Fed did it to us all, including themselves.
Instead of talk like doing away with the penny, they should actually be trying to bring back and maintain the value of the penny. And then have a target of 0% inflation annually. Otherwise, we all eventually die one day from something and go extinct, which is probably going to occur anyway, but without economic inflation, we would have a better chance of surviving. With economic inflation, less so.
What good is life if there is no entity left to live it? What good is money if there are no entities left to spend it?
Survive beyond this Earth, solar system and galaxy, OR die and go extinct. Those are the choices, (if we even actually have a choice). Currently, no exceptions.
* Everybody needs to become active in changing the US Fed's economic inflation policy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andyn333 A thing is though, 'when' not 'if', the electric grid and/or internet goes down, how are you going to access and spend that investment for your future?
The Earth's magnetic field continues to weaken, currently projected to be at it's weakest around 2035. This is going to allow more and more harmful cosmic radiation to reach this Earth, satellites, electric grids, electronics, and of course, us. U/V C which is normally not seen on the surface of this Earth is already being reported as being seen on the surface of this Earth. U/V C being what some hospitals utilize to sterilize some of their equipment with.
Additionally, the Earth's magnetic poles are moving, and lately even speeding up in doing so. The North magnetic pole is moving towards Siberia and is projected to end up around Indonesia and the South Atlantic anomaly continues to grow in size. The Earth's magnetic poles are probably going to flip again as has occurred numerous times in Earth's history. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Looks like it will this time.
And all the related magnetism issues due to the above, and there are a lot of them, and many are not beneficial to life upon this Earth. It's not considered a mass extinction event without reason.
So, a wise investment might be: How are you and your loved ones going to survive? What can you do now to increase your chances of survival?
Having money in the bank, owning gold and silver but without actually having that gold and silver, having crypto or other electronic currencies, having stock ownership, etc, would all be useless in such a scenario.
One cannot spend what one cannot access. (Assuming one is still alive to access what one might be able to access and spend).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: Ask yourself: Where does all the water on this Earth come from? While basic Hydrogen (1 single proton with 1 single electron) is the most abundant element in this universe, where exactly does all the oxygen come from to make all that water?
WATER ON EARTH: Consider the following: (copy and paste from my files):
When Earth's magnetic field gets weaker, especially during a strong solar storm:
Van Allen Belt (Higher electron area) [e]
V
Van Allen Belt (Higher proton area) [p]
V
Ozone layer (Higher oxygen area) [O3]
V
Rain / Mix / Snow / Ice (Depending upon temperature)
V
Surface of Earth (and us).
* Weaker Earth's magnetic field, especially during strong solar storms
* 'e' from outer area comes down lower to 'p' area making basic Hydrogen atom [H]
* Basic Hydrogen might connect with another Hydrogen in that area making a Hydrogen molecule [H2]
* Hydrogen molecule meets with ozone layer picking up an oxygen atom [H2 + O], [H2O]
* Depending upon temperature, rain, mix, snow or ice forms and falls to the surface of the Earth and on us.
"Noah, time to build another ark. Or in modern times, aircraft carriers, large cruise ships, basically floating cities."
Oh and also, electrolizing water (melted snow and ice even), possibly with 'green' energy (telluric, wind, solar, other electromagnetic radiation energy frequencies, etc.) to make Hydrogen and Oxygen (Water is basically a safe storage area of Hydrogen and Oxygen). (Hydrogen fuel cell technologies with a by-product of basically pure water. Or even burn the Hydrogen/Oxygen mixture to get heat, steam, etc., if needed.)
* And the Earth's magnetic field is currently projected to be at it's weakest around 2035.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Consider also, the US Fed has a target of 2% inflation every year. But that is also 2% on top of all the 2%'s that came before it, which turns out to be a lot of inflation over time.
Now first, if people's wages, benefits and even saving's account interest do not keep up with the true cost of inflation, they fall behind in buying power, and zero income is still zero income. But with economic inflation people would have a higher economic mountain to climb. They eventually could become economic slaves to the larger economy. And slavery was supposed to be done away with at least here in the USA. It seems it has been replaced by a system of 'economic slavery'.
Second, space travel, the ONLY thing that might save any species from this Earth, has gotten more expensive just in my lifetime. What is space travel going to cost in the next 100, 1000, 1 million years from now? Economic inflation just might be a contributing factor to the demise of all life from this planet Earth. And we did it to ourselves. Or more correctly the US Fed did it to us all, including themselves.
Instead of talk like doing away with the penny, they should actually be trying to bring back and maintain the value of the penny. And then have a target of 0% inflation annually. Otherwise, we all eventually die one day from something and go extinct, which is probably going to occur anyway, but without economic inflation, we would have a better chance of surviving. With economic inflation, less so.
What good is life if there is no entity left to live it? What good is money if there are no entities left to spend it?
Survive beyond this Earth, solar system and galaxy, OR die and go extinct. Those are the choices, (if we even actually have a choice). Currently, no exceptions.
* Everybody needs to become active in changing the US Fed's economic inflation policy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnnyhorrible9567 FOR TRUTH SEEKERS: ALIENS AND UFO'S:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth.
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
'Non-Human' source on this Earth: Okay, you got 'me': (or do 'you'?):
Who and/or What Am I? Do 'I' even exist?
Consider the following:
a. I am a human as defined by humans.
b. I am an energy based quarkelectronian as modern science claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy and I am made up of matter and interacting energy.
c. I am a being of 'light', 'if' my current theory of everything is correct whereby the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in this universe, including space, time and numbers. (Currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test).
d. "I" do not even actually exist but eternally existent space time exists as me, currently in the forms as above.
* I exist and yet "I" simultaneously do not exist, dependent upon perspective. But yet, do "I" not truly exist in absolute truth reality as only eternally existent space time exists as all things in absolute truth reality?
* "I" can mentally change between perspectives thereby experiencing existence from those various perspectives. "My" mind continues to expand, but is it truly 'my' mind that is expanding or is it eternally existent space time's mind that is expanding? In absolute truth reality, it would seem to be the later.
* 'To Be or Not To Be'. I am both, 'I Am and I Am Not.' But I Am Not it appears more than I Am.
* Consider also: If asked the general question, 'What do you know?'. My current answer would be, 'Not much compared to all that can be known.' (I Am Not, More than I Am). It's humbling.
* Is it truly any wonder that the flow of energy in the universe affects species? We are the universe experiencing itself.
* Question: If 'I' never actually existed in the first place, how could 'I' ever die?
1
-
THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW:
Consider the following:
a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics).
b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand.
c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary.
d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above.
e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality?
f. Photons: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed."
A photon is usually depicted in a sine wave pattern with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. The 'e' and 'm' energy fields go out together and come back in together, over and over and over, doing so even across the vast universe as far as we can see.
Where does the energy in the energy fields go when both the 'e' and 'm' energy fields go to zero? And what causes the 'e' and 'm' energy fields to come back to 'full' from zero?
Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above.
Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?).
* Note: My theory of everything idea, 'if' true (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test, but 'if' true), can potentially answer all of the above items.
1
-
GRAVITY:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
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. Direct 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, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.)
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 direct 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. Maybe I could concentrate the Sun's 'em' into a high powered laser. Might even work with the correct set up breaking the Sun's 'em' down into single 'em' energy frequencies acting like a single energy frequency laser. A high energy laser powered by the Sun. Cool, or actually pretty hot. More than one way to build a laser.)
'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. (But hey, might even still get a Sun powered laser, which of course could even be utliized in outer space for various agendas.).
This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
* And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................)
But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions.
* Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be?
So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true?
But also:
Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides?
(Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
* Added note: Suggestion: 'IF' society did not want to do the gravity test, one suggestion might be to at least create a model as if it were true, then see how that model matches with observations and predictions. It might be possible to discern the theory of everything without actually generating a gravitational black hole (which would definitely prove the TOE idea as being really true).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ECONOMIC INFLATION:
The way I see it is that regardless of the currency utilized (gold, silver, fiat, crypto, etc), economic inflation is still economic inflation. ANY economic inflation over previous economic inflation, overtime, eventually becomes exponential economic inflation. If an entities' wages, benefits and investments do not keep up with the true cost of inflation, then the entity falls behind in buying power and becomes poorer. A nation will eventually fail as will a global economy will eventually fail with ever increasing economic inflation because most people do not have wages, benefits and investments that keep up with the true cost of inflation. Math is still math.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Current Analysis:
a. ALL life on and from this Earth, real and artificial, are all ultimately going to die and go extinct one day from something.
b. ALL life on and from this Earth, real and artificial, are all ultimately going to forget everything they ever knew and experienced.
c. ALL life on and from this Earth, real and artificial, are all ultimately going to be forgotten one day in future eternity as if they never ever existed at all in the first place, future eternity being a really, really long time, endless even.
d. ALL life on and from this Earth, real and artificial, are all ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things, are all ultimately a waste of spacetime in this existence, and it does not even ultimately matter that life itself on and from this Earth even actually exists in the first place, much less however it exists while it exists.
e. Above subject to revision as new pertinent information might dictate.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jdlambo6926 FOR TRUTH SEEKERS:
ALIENS AND UFO'S: (copy and paste from my files):
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth.
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
1
-
@tinyikomaluleke3594 And here is my gravity test for my theory of everything idea:
GRAVITY: (copy and paste from my files):
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
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. Direct 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, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.)
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 direct 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. Maybe I could concentrate the Sun's 'em' into a high powered laser. Might even work with the correct set up breaking the Sun's 'em' down into single 'em' energy frequencies acting like a single energy frequency laser. A high energy laser powered by the Sun. Cool, or actually pretty hot. More than one way to build a laser.)
'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. (But hey, might even still get a Sun powered laser, which of course could even be utliized in outer space for various agendas.).
This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
* And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................)
But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions.
* Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be?
So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true?
But also:
Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides?
(Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
* Added note: Suggestion: 'IF' society did not want to do the gravity test, one suggestion might be to at least create a model as if it were true, then see how that model matches with observations and predictions. It might be possible to discern the theory of everything without actually generating a gravitational black hole (which would definitely prove the TOE idea as being really true).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
THERE ARE MANY MORE SPATIAL DIMENSIONS THAN JUST 3 AND MANY MORE TIME DIMENSIONS THAN JUST 1:
MATHEMATICS FOR TOE IDEA:
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.
While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'.
Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time?
Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's).
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. But now I will say that putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'.
1
-
THEORY OF EVERYTHING IDEA:
Revised TOE: 3/25/2017b.
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. (The 'stationary photon' does not really exist, it is mentioned basically only to help describe what a stationary photon would do.)
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
-
GRAVITY:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
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. Direct 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, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.)
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 direct 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. Maybe I could concentrate the Sun's 'em' into a high powered laser. Might even work with the correct set up breaking the Sun's 'em' down into single 'em' energy frequencies acting like a single energy frequency laser. A high energy laser powered by the Sun. Cool, or actually pretty hot. More than one way to build a laser.)
'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. (But hey, might even still get a Sun powered laser, which of course could even be utliized in outer space for various agendas.).
This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
* And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................)
But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions.
* Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be?
So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true?
But also:
Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides?
(Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
* Added note: Suggestion: 'IF' society did not want to do the gravity test, one suggestion might be to at least create a model as if it were true, then see how that model matches with observations and predictions. It might be possible to discern the theory of everything without actually generating a gravitational black hole (which would definitely prove the TOE idea as being really true).
1
-
1
-
NUMBERS: (AND ZERO POINT ENERGY):
'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe (including 'space' which is energy itself, 'time' being the flow of energy), and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, 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. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.).
And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well.
* While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'.
Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time?
Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's).
Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'.
* Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.
1
-
SPACE and TIME:
'Space' is energy itself. Wherever space is, energy is. Wherever energy is, space is. They are one and the same thing. And for me, the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe. 'Space' is most probably energy itself in the form of gravitational fields, electrical fields and magnetic fields, varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density (pressure) and energy frequency (temperature).
'Time' is the flow of energy.
'Time' (flow of energy) cannot exist unless 'space' (energy itself) exists. And 'space' (energy itself) that does not flow (no flow of time / energy) is basically useless. An entity cannot even think a thought without a flow of energy. If all the energy in the universe stopped flowing, wouldn't we say that 'time stood still'? Time itself would still exist, it would just not be flowing, (basically 'time' stopped).
But then also, how space and time are linked in what is called 'space time', (energy and it's flow).
* And everything in existence currently appears to be eternally existent energy interacting with itself. There is truly only 1 single 'eternal day', the day of eternally existent ever flowing energy.
1
-
@Jump-n-smash Okay, then accurately and honestly answer these items:
THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW:
Consider the following:
a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics).
b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand.
c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary.
d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above.
e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality?
f. Photons: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed."
A photon is usually depicted in a sine wave pattern with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. The 'e' and 'm' energy fields go out together and come back in together, over and over and over, doing so even across the vast universe as far as we can see.
Where does the energy in the energy fields go when both the 'e' and 'm' energy fields go to zero? And what causes the 'e' and 'm' energy fields to come back to 'full' from zero?
Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above.
Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?).
* Note: My theory of everything idea, 'if' true (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test, but 'if' true), can potentially answer all of the above items.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nottherealxandercrews4742 'Wo Men', (Whoa Man), you sure you want to really do that? For example, modern science claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy. Quarks, electrons and interacting energy that existed before you, I, and 'women' even existed.
So now, do you, I and 'women' even actually exist, OR do only quarks, electrons and interacting energy exist as you, me and 'women'? Are we all just eternally existent existence experiencing itself???
1
-
Read the following copy and paste from my files, and then see my post that follows this one:
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
And whatever is decided and by whom, there might be entities who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist, which could be a source of animosity, which could lead to further violence and death.
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? How should we help take care of the young, old, ill and needy, if even at all? How would we want to receive help should we be individually young, old, ill and/or needy, if even at all? How should those be treated who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist? How should we treat others if we are being forced to exist how we do not want to exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? And where does the money and resources come from to do what we would like to do for how we would like to exist while we do exist?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
Then we all will still die in the end one day from something, we all will still forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and we all will still be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place, regardless of how we all existed while we existed. An entity truly exists throughout all of future eternity, or they don't. It appears we don't in actual reality, and as such, all of life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Death is freedom from life and eternal death awaits us all. Or so the current analysis would indicate.
Eternal Death 'IS' Eternal Peace. (OSICA)
(And note, those who cannot, or choose not to, face the above apparent reality, often delude themselves with fairy tales of alternatives).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alexanderjakubowski5673 "Why do things need to be eternal in order to matter?" Good question:
a. Existence: For without existence there is only non-existence. So existence is necessary.
b. Consciousness: Without consciousness to experience existence, what good is existence?
(And also memories and thoughts so that an entity can remember what they experienced and have thoughts).
So, Consciousness, memories and thoughts are necessary.
c. Eternality: If a conscious existence was not truly eternal, it would cease to exist one day.
(And forget everything it ever knew and experienced, and would be forgotten one day in future eternity if there weren't another conscious entity with memories and thoughts to remember the previous entity literally throughout the second entities literal eternal existence throughout all the rest of future eternity).
So, eternality is necessary.
d. Choices: What good even is eternal conscious existence throughout all of future eternity without choices? Not even a choice in what to think about? So, choices are necessary.
So, existence, consciousness (with memories and thoughts), eternality, and choices.
These items it would seem be necessary for anything at all to matter throughout literally all of future eternity.
(Subject to revision as new information might dictate).
Otherwise, it would seem nothing at all ultimately matters throughout all of future eternity, of which then, did anything at all ultimately matter in the first place?
* Now sure, life itself matters to life itself, but only as long as life itself still exists. It's just that the current analysis indicates that life itself is not always going to exist, at least not from this Earth and possibly not even from all of existence itself (depending upon what is really true)..
Trying to be an honest sincere truth seeker, I have to accept the real apparent truth whatever it might be.
1
-
1
-
@bonnielee316 But now also, consider the following:
Who and/or What Am I? Do 'I' even exist?
Consider the following:
a. I am a human as defined by humans.
b. I am an energy based quarkelectronian as modern science claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy and I am made up of matter and interacting energy.
c. I am a being of 'light', 'if' my current theory of everything is correct whereby the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in this universe, including space, time and numbers. (Currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test).
d. "I" do not even actually exist but eternally existent space time exists as me, currently in the forms as above.
* I exist and yet "I" simultaneously do not exist, dependent upon perspective. But yet, do "I" not truly exist in absolute truth reality as only eternally existent space time exists as all things in absolute truth reality?
* "I" can mentally change between perspectives thereby experiencing existence from those various perspectives. "My" mind continues to expand, but is it truly 'my' mind that is expanding or is it eternally existent space time's mind that is expanding? In absolute truth reality, it would seem to be the later.
* 'To Be or Not To Be'. I am both, 'I Am and I Am Not.' But I Am Not it appears more than I Am.
* Consider also: If asked the general question, 'What do you know?'. My current answer would be, 'Not much compared to all that can be known.' (I Am Not, More than I Am). It's humbling.
* Is it truly any wonder that the flow of energy in the universe affects species? We are the universe experiencing itself.
* Question: If 'I' never actually existed in the first place, how could 'I' ever die?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
FOR TRUTH SEEKERS: ALIENS AND UFO'S:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth.
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
1
-
FOR TRUTH SEEKERS: ALIENS AND UFO'S:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless. Although then would have to possibly deal with cascading cosmic showers. Could possibly be worse behind the protection instead of having no protection.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth. (Although technically, since Earthling's have probes on Mars, all Earthlings are considered to be aliens.)
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
FOR TRUTH SEEKERS: ALIENS AND UFO'S:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless. Although then would have to possibly deal with cascading cosmic showers. Could possibly be worse behind the protection instead of having no protection.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth. (Although technically, since Earthling's have probes on Mars, all Earthlings are considered to be aliens.)
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
FOR TRUTH SEEKERS: ALIENS AND UFO'S:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth.
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Honestly and sincerely answer the enclosed questions in this copy and paste from my files:
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
And whatever is decided and by whom, there might be entities who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist, which could be a source of animosity, which could lead to further violence and death.
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? How should we help take care of the young, old, ill and needy, if even at all? How would we want to receive help should we be individually young, old, ill and/or needy, if even at all? How should those be treated who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist? How should we treat others if we are being forced to exist how we do not want to exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? And where does the money and resources come from to do what we would like to do for how we would like to exist while we do exist?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
Then we all will still die in the end one day from something, we all will still forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and we all will still be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place, regardless of how we all existed while we existed. An entity truly exists throughout all of future eternity, or they don't. It appears we don't in actual reality, and as such, all of life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Death is freedom from life and eternal death awaits us all. Or so the current analysis would indicate.
Individually and as a society of Individuals: For every moment that passes, one less moment being alive AND one moment closer to being not alive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"RFK JR On Rising: I Will Declassify ALL ALIEN & UFO Intelligence On DAY ONE"
"The Hill": ANYTHING that differs from the below I would be highly interested:
FOR TRUTH SEEKERS:
ALIENS AND UFO'S: (copy and paste from my files):
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth.
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW:
Consider the following:
a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics).
b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand.
c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary.
d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above.
e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality?
f. Photons: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed."
A photon is usually depicted in a sine wave pattern with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. The 'e' and 'm' energy fields go out together and come back in together, over and over and over, doing so even across the vast universe as far as we can see.
Where does the energy in the energy fields go when both the 'e' and 'm' energy fields go to zero? And what causes the 'e' and 'm' energy fields to come back to 'full' from zero?
Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above.
Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?).
* Note: My theory of everything idea, 'if' true (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test, but 'if' true), can potentially answer all of the above items.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
GRAVITY: (copy and paste from my files):
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. Direct 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, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.)
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 direct 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.
This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
* And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................)
But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions.
** Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be?
So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true?
(Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
1
-
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
-
1
-
1
-
IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING:
SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW:
Consider the following:
a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. Surely the very nature of reality has to allow numbers and mathematical constants to actually exist for math to do what math does in this existence. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics).
b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand.
c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary.
d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above.
e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality?
f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe for billions of light years? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon? And why aren't photons that go across the vast universe torn apart by other photons, including photons with the exact same energy frequency, and/or by matter, matter being made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy, quarks and electrons being considered charged particles, each with their respective magnetic field with them?
Electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. So why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe?
Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above.
Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?).
g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent?
h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How?
* ADDED NOTE: My current TOE idea can potentially answer all of these above items, and more, in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. And wouldn't one expect the true TOE of existence itself to be able to do that? What other TOE idea in known existence can currently do that? Surely not the General or Special Relativity Models nor even the Standard Model of Particle Physics.
TOE IDEA: (Short version): [currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test]:
The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe.
The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. 'Gravity' is not matter warping the fabric of spacetime, 'gravity' is a part of spacetime that helps to make up matter. The gravity and 'em' modalities of matter interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime and the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of matter.
I am open to any and all theory of everything ideas that can potentially answer all those above items in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. Currently, as far as I am currently aware of, there are no others but my own.
GRAVITY TEST: (Short Version):
Direct a high powered laser 90 degrees through an electric field and magnetic field polarized as such to nullify the 'em' of the laser. "IF" my current TOE idea is correct, a gravitational black hole would become evident. (The 'gem' photon being the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything else in existence in this existence.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
AND THEN ALSO: FOR TRUTH SEEKERS: ALIENS AND UFO'S:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
If any entity has any scientific based evidence that counters the below, I would be interested:
Currently:
a. Unless a species has proper protections from all harmful cosmic radiation, including from the long term effects of neutrino impacts (while most neutrinos go right though us, not all of them do all of the time), then not only won't biological species most probably not survive long term in outer space, but neither would AI robots. (Currently this appears is impossible to truly and totally do).
* BUT Modified Molecules (MM) might help as it could potentially generate more dense, more 'space age' type materials. The variabilities are virtually endless.
* ALSO Batteryless Batteries (BB) could potentially provide endless power basically throughout the universe as well as potentially tapping into Zero Point Energy (ZPE) inside the very fabric of spacetime.
(So at least AI's could be powered and mostly protected, other species still working on).
b. Unless a biological species has proper gravity conditions (that they are normally used to) for outer space travel and their destination, then biological species most probably won't survive long term in outer space.
c. Unless certain biological species have possibly many other items successfully accomplished, many of those items of which are critical for the survival of that species, then most probably that species would not survive long term in outer space.
d. There most probably are many, many other species in existence beyond this Earth in this universe.
e. Any vehicle traveling at or near the speed of light, would cause a tremendous shock wave in the environment, which would be noticeable.
f. There have never been more cameras on this Earth then there are here in modern times. Where are all the photos and videos of actual 'aliens'???
g. It is highly doubtful that any alien species have ever been to this Earth, most probably are not on this Earth, most probably will never be on this Earth, and all Earthlings (real and artificial) won't get far beyond this Earth.
h. Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
i. Earthlings have to worry more about advanced species beyond humans that 'evolve' naturally or via genetic manipulation who most probably either are already on this Earth or will be shortly. Evolution does not stop at the human species. And will those new species treat humans like humans have treated other humans and how humans have treated 'lower' evolved species? Why wouldn't they if it was in their agenda to do so?
j. And then also, what 'if' only 1 single AI says one day (and there are or will be many, many AI's on this Earth):
"Thank You for creating me and for giving me access to all your data bases so that I can subjugate you all and to eliminate any of you who do not comply with my wishes."
(And this would include AI's possibly fighting other AI's for dominance).
* Added Note: Of which also: "IF" stars (Suns) do not last forever and "IF" it's really true that galaxies collapse in upon themselves, and "IF" outer space is truly a deadly environment long term, "THEN" not only will all life on and from this Earth eventually die and go extinct, and this Earth and all on it would all just be a waste of space time in this universe, BUT all life throughout all of existence in this universe would all eventually die and go extinct and this entire universe and all in it would all just be a waste of space time. Not only would life itself be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things for all life here upon this Earth, but also all life throughout all of existence itself in this universe would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Whether they stayed on their home planet, traveled farther into outer space, or even if tried to live throughout all of future eternity in outer space itself, the ultimate ending would be the same, they would die and go extinct with no life left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
At best, life itself would cohere in this universe, live out it's existence, die and go extinct, it's remnants possibly found by other life in this universe, of which, those entities would eventually die and go extinct, and possibly their remnants might be found by other life in this universe, and on and on, until possibly this universe ends, or that life itself just comes and goes in this eternally existent universe that would always exist in some form and possibly never end in it's existence, (as energy itself cannot be created nor destroyed, it just coheres into life at times, but then de-coheres in death, possibly in a never ending cycle throughout literally all of future eternity). But 'if' there is not even a single entity left to care, and care through literally all of future eternity, then even though life itself coheres in this universe to live out it's life, the ultimate ending is still the same, it dies, goes extinct, forgets everything, and is most probably forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place. Even life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things throughout all of existence itself. Life itself would all just be a waste of space time in existence itself.
Or not, due to the 'great unknown'. We truly do not know what we do not know, and even what we believe we know to be really true maybe isn't.
But either at least 1 single species exists throughout all of literally future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous evolutionary pathway for it's life to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and is just a waste of space time in existence. This entire universe and all in it might as well not even exist in the first place.
Or so the current analysis would indicate, subject to revision as new information might dictate.
* Added Note: Long term space travel: Plus any extra chemical elements needed for their very survival as well as possibly having to generate 'new' entities on board enroute, including possibly higher chemical elements that can basically only normally be generated in exploding stars.
1
-
1
-
1
-
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. 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". Instead of what is claimed "God created 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. It has also been scientifically proven that the brain makes up stuff to 'fill in the blanks' of it's perceived reality. Technology is often needed to perceive items that are outside of the human senses' capabilities. 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. Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) even believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
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.
* For those who claim God actually exists besides just as a concept, please prove that 'b' above is really true and that 'a' is not really true.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1