Entries Tagged 'more odd' ↓

Light speed is considered a constant and who dares to argue the point?

I dare say I’m willing to give it a go…light speed is determined to be 299,792,458 meters per second based on the observers perception of light traveling a distance of one meter in exactly 1/299,792,458ths of a second.

The first problem with this is the terms employed as they are completely inadequate.  Sure they might be applicable to many aspects of trade and commerce but not very useful in this case.

On top of this it is assumed that light travels in a linear fashion, much like a train or a speeding bullet, but having no mass.  And of course this is quite impossible if for no other reason than the universe failing to cooperate, as the universe is not linearly structured.  Therefore space cannot be measured using a ruler and a clock.

As the universe exists in a dynamic state it would follow that light being a common occurrence throughout the universe would also exist in a dynamic state, which disqualifies the concept of a constant, in respect to the perception of light having a speed.

It is important to keep in mind that Einstein employed the concept of light speed remaining constant due to his view at the time, 1905, that the universe existed in a static state.  In later years he came to realize this was not the case, but it would seem many others missed the point.

Today light speed is employed to determine the size and age of universe, with scientists reporting having taken photographs of distant galaxies.  In this respect they ask us to accept their perception of space in that they have photographed events having occurred billions of years ago, with the photographed subject being situated billions of light years distance from Earth.

Therefore it is believed that the outer boundary of the visible universe is some 14 billion light years away with the universe expanding at a fantastic rate.

Keep in mind that to make any kind of sense of this one must accept the constancy of light speed over a period of roughly 14 billion years, which is a stretch of the imagination to say the least.

Some years ago it was determined that the universe existed in simultaneous state, with Einstein adding his two cents worth as well…he stated clearly that; “time is different for every system in motion.”  And what an amazing statement that was and still is,  but unfortunately not very well understood.

This means that both past and future conditions exist relative to our earth with both past and future conditions existing simultaneously.  This suggests time is different for every planetary body in space.

In a simultaneous universe you do not find or even need light traveling for millions or even billions of years to reach us.  What you see is what you get whether it be a past condition or a future condition existing simultaneously.

Time is a relative factor of space, which is dynamic, therefore light speed over such distances cannot be constant if in fact light does have a speed.

It’s the perception of the beast that fools us into believing we have it right, but in fact we have it wrong.  Light is simply a condition of field, just as gravity is a condition of field and neither one has a speed or a speed limit we can refer to as a constant.

Light is incapable of linear motion, as for it to do so it would have to be in motion independent of the field in which it is observed to be situated and this is not the case.

Light speed is said to be constant coming or going, which again relies on one’s imagination to remain acceptable.  Of course Mich and Morley did their famous experiment and had great difficulty in accepting its failure, but I don’t think it was a failure, not at all.

If they had found a difference in light speed they would have proven light to be capable of linear motion, but they did not prove anything of the kind.  If light has no actual speed the results of their experiment demonstrated the point very clearly because direction would not matter in the slightest.

The only thing being measured in respect to light speed is a time delay and nothing more.

The motion of the light is not a factor as the motion of light cannot be measured in terms of so many meters per second.  Consequently the size and age of universe remains an unknown.

A time delay corresponding to the assumed speed of light is as fast as any reaction can be affected in the context of our relative existence on this planet.  But it has nothing to do with the motion of light traveling from point A to point B, because light does not travel in a linear fashion as does a train or a speeding bullet.

The existing perception of universe is limited to the scope of our existing scientific dogma, which is not at all helpful in moving us forward to a fundamental comprehension of universe and our relationship to universe.

It might get you high marks on an exam, but it wont get you any closer to knowing much about our universe.

Light speed is a critical point and deserves a complete rethink and a complete overhaul.  We need to know one way or the other if light has a speed…it either does or it doesn’t.

Light is either on or off, if it’s on it’s visible and if it’s off it’s not.

It only takes light 8 minutes to travel from the sun to the Earth if light is actually in motion, if it is not in motion there is no travel time because it’s not traveling.

If in fact there is a time delay between the sun and the earth that time delay remains relative to our planet earth…put the same instruments on the moon and the time delay will be considerably shorter.  But in neither case is the lights motion required or even possible.

Think about it…peer reviewed papers cannot change the reality of universe, the universe dictates the laws and principles applicable to understanding and comprehension.

Why should the fossil fuel industry receive subsidies, huge sums of money, when solar power is more efficient and cheaper to produce….it saves money.

Solar power cells could make the USA energy self sufficient if the same level of funding was applied as is now applied to the fossil fuel industries.

Huge profits are made from fossil fuels, yet these industries are also collecting corporate welfare which amounts to billions of dollars all of which is funded by the tax payer who is also the consumer.

Adequate funding of solar power would create many thousands of new jobs, jobs that are desperately needed…it would also allow North America to become self sufficient in respect to its energy needs now and in the future.

Solar power cells are efficient and cost effective, with minimal pollution.

Let’s get solar cell technology out into the light of day and reveal it for what it is…the answer to our energy needs.

It has been proven in countries receiving a fraction of the sunlight the USA receives during a year and it’s working very well.  It would work even better in Canada and the USA.

There are answers, there are solutions, but is there the will to make the leap?

nice solar demographix

The sun exists relative to the earth and of course the earth exists relative to the sun, but the relative relationship existing between the sun and the earth and the earth and the sun are two different things, a critical point which our modern science tends to ignore.

Then we have the moon which adds a third factor to the mix whereby we have twelve different relative conditions to consider in our attempt to understand the various effects each one has on the other two.

To consider the activity involved in the solar cycle culminating in 2012 and or 2013 we must understand the relationship of the sun to the earth and the earth to the sun.

In terms of time field frequency acceleration the earth has a much lower rate of acceleration than the sun, therefore the sun existing relative to the earth must be viewed as a historical aspect of the sun’s continuance.

This becomes apparent in respect to our historical testing of nuclear weapons as early as 1945.  For all intents and purposes our nuclear testing appeared to have no effect upon either the sun or the moon so we assumed all was well and continued testing.  However we did not consider the field frequency acceleration differential existing between the sun and the earh or the field frequency acceleration differential existing between the moon and the earth.

What does this mean to us today?

It means we have yet to experience the effects our nuclear testing has had on the sun and moon due to field frequency differentials, which can be also referred to as time/line differentials.

To understand this more clearly you might read the book Unity which is available as a free down load on this web site.

The full impact of our nuclear testing has yet to manifest in a manner affecting our present condition as the effect of a nuclear detonation is simultaneous regardless of the distance involved, which allows such an effect to cross time/line boundaries.

This of course provides us with a false sense of safety in respect to our nuclear agenda,  as we have assumed there to be no significant consequences associated with our neighboring sun and moon.  This however is far from the truth due to our lack of understanding and comprehension of time/line differentials.

It would appear there are indeed significant consequences, a moot point we have yet to fully appreciate.

Let’s just cut the crap about controlling the weather and get down to the nitty gritty.

The weather on our planet is changing and will continue to change in a most radical manner for the foreseeable future.

More rain,  more hail, more wind, cyclones, tornadoes, snow, ice and extreme heat.

Like almost everything these days the weather will remain volatile to say the least.

The earth sun cycle is culminating in a display of mother natures powers unleashed, as the energy differential existing between the earth and the sun increases in a steep upward curve.

All this babble about carbon tax and carbon caps is nothing more than a distraction from the very real and immediate situation, the climate is changing and there is nothing we humans can do to stop it.

Certainly we should do all we can to eliminate pollution, but pollution and climate change are two separate issues which should not be confused.  Pollution does not account for nor is it responsible for climate change.  Climate change runs in natural cycles, which includes short cycles and long cycles.  At the present time we are nearing the end of the long cycle which corresponds directly to the underlying energy differential existing between the earth and the sun.

All you have to do is check the global weather picture to see unusual weather conditions affecting each and every continent.  Heat waves in  India,  tornadoes in America,  hail storms in India resulting in devastation and hardship for many.  And weather related deaths on opposite sides of the planet.

It’s going to get worse as we move closer to the long cycles end, at which point we will experience weather like we’ve never seen it before.  It’s going to be a rough and wild ride.

I cannot predict the weather,  one reason being that such extreme weather is unpredictable, with the word EXTREME underlined in red.

As well as extreme weather we can expect more earthquakes and more volcanic activity.  The earth is under extreme stress as its resistance to the sun increases and no amount of taxation and no number of regulations are going to alter the natural course of our solar cycle.

Carbon dioxide is not the problem affecting weather, but weather does have an effect on the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere.

Our planets relationship with the sun determines our weather and I know of no one or any group of people capable of changing that relationship.  Therefore it is a delusional idea to suggest it should be possible to change the planets weather through the application of regulations and or taxes.

The whole idea behind the carbon tax is to assure the population that government regulatory bodies will tame and subdue extreme weather threatening to disrupt the global economy…if sufficient quantities of money are applied to the problem.

For once it’s not about the money, it’s about the weather.  And no amount of money is going to affect the earth/sun relationship whatsoever.  It’s a natural cycle and natural cycles will prevail regardless of our wishes or desires.

New energy promises many things, not the least of which is a clean and efficient method of producing electricity.

Water driven turbines already do exactly that, but water power is not available in many parts of the world or there is insufficient water power to provide for the demand of electricity.

Many methods have been investigated and some have proven somewhat successful, but still fall short of providing for the worlds energy needs.

The idea of taping into the aether field is a new energy dream, but few seem to realize that all events, actions, reactions, form and structure are initially driven by aether energy without which there would be no universe.

We view actions and reactions seemingly through a mirror whereby we see or view the universe back to front or simply put; ass backwards.

If new energy is to be successfully developed we have to know exactly what energy is in respect to how energy affects the form and function of all physical structure.

The idea of a mechanical devise providing electrical power over shadows the source of electricity.

There is nothing mechanical about the universe, the earth, moon or sun and each system has its own power source.

Electricity is a dynamic response to a differential in the underlying energy of the system involved.  This means a hydro electric plant on our planet takes advantage of a naturally occurring differential in this underlying energy.  Nothing too complicated about that.

But our planet earth also functions on the basis of an energy differential sustaining and perpetuating the earths form and function, which is in and of itself a dynamic system.

If we are to employ this underlying energy for our industrial and domestic power supply we must learn to modulate this aether energy in a controlled manner.

This takes us into a whole new realm which we may not have considered possible.

We have made up many rules over the years, one of which suggests that no new energy is created and no energy is destroyed, which may or may not be correct.  But one thing is certain, the underlying energy of universe is dynamic and continually increasing.

Therefore it would be impossible to run out of this naturally occurring energy.

Each and every system of universe represents an energy well where an inflow of energy is focused to the core and by designing and constructing a modular system we could provide for the worlds energy needs.

Not at all impossible, but to date given very little serious consideration.