Why most professionals are so stupid?

[freepenguin]

Can somebody tell me why?

Whenever I face with head-to-head discussion about FE, they behave stupidly all the time.
A typical example is the professional blindly believes in the second law of thermodynamics is absolute truth.

The state of entropy, disorder always increase of a system.

This absurd law of physics only apply to a close system that has complete known values, i.e. an internal combustion engine. I have no problem using thermodynamics to measure, explain the behavior of IC engines, any heat generating device that convert external energy source to produce usable energy.

Well the entropy law miserably fails to explain about the process of evolution of all life on Earth. How could possibly single cell orgasms keep evolving for multi-cell orgasms, if the laws forces always to increase the disorder at atomic level?

Big Bang theory in cosmology is a complete joke IMHO. Most professionals believe in wholeheartedly because it uses the entropy law and energy conservation law. Energy conservation law also can only be applied to situations when total energy is fixed or verifiable.

We don't know total energy of the universe. We don't know our physical universe is connected to other universe or complete close or open system. Humble scientists admit humans barely understand or observe 5% of known universe.

In addition when I write about FE technology, I do not say a word that implies "infinity". But it's irrelevant to pros. They simply attack me "Infinite energy is impossible." It seems their brains automatically replace "free" as "infinite" not "open" concept.

Some of them agree with we have big energy problems. However at the end they act stupidly, goes back to the obsolete, absurd world.

Einstein's theory of Relativity is technically dead thanks to Electric Universe supporters like Stephen Crothers. The behind story how all esoteric, supposedly existing celestial bodies such as Black Holes, Neutron stars, dark matter, man-made concepts out of flawed theory that is far from physical reality.

EU scientists suggest the Sun's energy source is not thermal nuclear fusion at the core. They come up with a plasma sphere model that produces energy mostly by electromagnetic force. It makes much more sense to me.

Matter becomes plasma when it's absorb enough energy so that it exists as electrical charges in space. Plasma moves beyond weak gravitational force.

It's just plain stupid idea that when massive star collapses, gravity pulls all matter in plasma state to create a neutron star or a black hole. (Years ago I believed this nonsense as is because I did not have reasoning power to think independently.) Complex computer simulation based on wrong mathematics formula definitely create black holes. This is why wrong/boxed in science is very dangerous.

What condition makes humongous number of electric charged particles under 10^38 times stronger force than gravity, theoretically condense enough to form infinite density for a black hole?

I've discovered many questions that put big big question marks on conventional laws of physics. Why would the pros accept the limitation of present paradigm in general and embrace alternative theories, ideas that fix the damn problems in 21th century?

I like to see the butterfly effect soon. Maybe I'm in a delusional state. I wonder.

[SilverToGold]

I wouldn't say they are "stupid" but mislead in lies.

It goes beyond professionals, even the free thinkers here still hold onto provable lies with no proof.

Try to tell someone that the earth is only 6000 years old and not millions or billions of years old. Offer them proof and reason and 99% of people still won't accept it. There is no evidence of an old earth but even here on this forum, most still buy this lie that is so easily proved wrong.

[Farmhand]

As soon as they mention the Thermodynamics laws just point out that solar
energy is free energy as is wind and hydro.

Yes the second law of thermodynamics does apply to closed systems and
would hold true in a closed system in my opinion. A solar system is not covered by the second law I don't think.

Second law of thermodynamics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium—the state of maximum entropy. Equivalently, perpetual motion machines of the second kind are impossible.

I see no reason why people are trying to break that law. Or why people argue
about it it doesn't apply to an non isolated system.

Is there even such thing as an isolated system ? I don't think there is one
anywhere or ever has been.

I would appreciate if anyone would like to educate me and show me an
example of an "isolated" system.

Cheers

[Web000x]

I wouldn't say they are "stupid" but mislead in lies.

It goes beyond professionals, even the free thinkers here still hold onto provable lies with no proof.

Try to tell someone that the earth is only 6000 years old and not millions or billions of years old. Offer them proof and reason and 99% of people still won't accept it. There is no evidence of an old earth but even here on this forum, most still buy this lie that is so easily proved wrong.

I respect your opinion because of our discussions a couple of years ago, but this just sounds strange to me. I will objectively look at any evidence if you want to PM it to me. I don't want to hijack this thread.

Dave

[wayne.ct]

Ask not for whom the bell tolls, It tolls for thee.

Can somebody tell me why?

I can tell you why. It is because people CHOOSE to believe a lie. Put that phrase in Google and you will discover it comes from the Holy Bible.

Like what you say or imply, even in this forum you risk a lot of negative feedback because a lot of people choose to "fight back" when anybody mentions God.

I suggest that you accept this rough and ready attitude as part of the human condition. You can either ignore and continue your own research and development or allow yourself to be distracted and consumed by trying to change people that simply don't want to be changed. When you accomplish something great, they will be curious and come to you.

I don't have any great accomplishments in the FE field but I can work steadily on learning and understanding and I may yet have something great to show for my time and consistent effort.

If you have the $$$, it seems to me that Stan Meyer had quite a bit of success before the PTB managed to terminate his progress. If you know the story of Stan Meyer, I don't have to explain that. Go do some reading/research. Same for N. Tesla.

So, you want to know why? Tell me my answer does not have the "ring of TRUTH."

[wayne.ct]

Isolated systems

I would appreciate if anyone would like to educate me and show me an example of an "isolated" system.

You are quite correct. The law does NOT refer to isolated systems, but "closed" systems. In common language the two may be equated, but the terminology is weak.

The concept of a closed system is that energy, matter, etc. does not enter or leave the system being described. In typical conception, one would construct an imaginary "box" around the system under test, and insulate or isolate the system from receiving or emitting any particle or wave or energy, etc. Since one could never guarantee that in practice ... there are no real-world examples of a true closed system. The closed system exists only in theory. It does happen to be a pretty good theory, since noone has disproved the theory. In reality, no honest FE enthusiast has disproven it either. Most of the disagreements related to interpretations of what is being observed.

You can look at some of my recent posts to see examples of that.

My suggestion is that you consider the laws and claims of scientists and would-be scientists to be "theories" and subject to examination and possible exceptions and special cases. That way you can feel completely free to do endless numbers of real world experiments and someday completely baffle the closed minded know-it-alls that lurk behind EVERY corner.

[Farmhand]

I think the big bang theory is also misunderstood. Nothing cannot go bang,
the big bang was just the beginning of another cycle (in theory) everything
that went bang already existed.

Where everything came from is beyond human comprehension, there was
never nothing in the Universe.

Ask the smarty pants professionals what existed before the big bang and
where it came from originally. A coherent answer is impossible.

Ask them if anything existed before the big bang, if they say no ask them how nothing went bang.

The big bang is a valid theory when talking about the beginning of a cycle
(a new Universe) but it can never explain the origins of the stuff that went bang.

I think the electric Universe is good theory, but does it explain where
everything came from or explain how the actual building blocks of the Universe
came into existence ? No it cannot because it is impossible to fathom.

The Universe is eternal it has always been and it will always be. There is no
beginning and no end to it.

Everything that exists now has always existed in some form or another.

The Universe cannot be added to because it is everything, nor can anything
be taken away from it. The universe as a whole conforms to the second law
of thermodynamics. It simply must.

The universe is everything period. There is nothing that is not part of the
universe and as so it is the only real closed system in existence.

Cheers

[cplouffe]

I think the big bang theory is also misunderstood. Nothing cannot go bang,
the big bang was just the beginning of another cycle (in theory) everything
that went bang already existed.

Where everything came from is beyond human comprehension, there was
never nothing in the Universe.

Ask the smarty pants professionals what existed before the big bang and
where it came from originally. A coherent answer is impossible.

Ask them if anything existed before the big bang, if they say no ask them how nothing went bang.

The big bang is a valid theory when talking about the beginning of a cycle
(a new Universe) but it can never explain the origins of the stuff that went bang.

I think the electric Universe is good theory, but does it explain where
everything came from or explain how the actual building blocks of the Universe
came into existence ? No it cannot because it is impossible to fathom.

The Universe is eternal it has always been and it will always be. There is no
beginning and no end to it.

Everything that exists now has always existed in some form or another.

The Universe cannot be added to because it is everything, nor can anything
be taken away from it. The universe as a whole conforms to the second law
of thermodynamics. It simply must.

The universe is everything period. There is nothing that is not part of the
universe and as so it is the only real closed system in existence.

Cheers

Well put. I believe everything moves in cycles... life/death entropy/syntropy in breathe/out breathe. I also feel like Russell's cosmology is the closest I've come to an EU theory that explains the cycles, building blocks, and where we came from. But I also agree that we can never completely KNOW it as humans. The painting cannot KNOW the painter.

[Iotayodi]

I think the big bang theory is also misunderstood.

I do too as long as a mass is concerned. If there was an original mass that exploded where did it come from? Is it possible that 2 differing potentials came close enough together which caused this, "explosion", similar to a spark gap? The only two potentials I see is temperatures. Hot and Cold coming together.
Speculation.

[Farmhand]

I do too as long as a mass is concerned. If there was an original mass that exploded where did it come from? Is it possible that 2 differing potentials came close enough together which caused this, "explosion", similar to a spark gap? The only two potentials I see is temperatures. Hot and Cold coming together.
Speculation.

Walter Russell would put it like this in a diagram of the Earth.
The words below in the box are sound like what you said above but the
last few words are interesting as well.



His atom diagram. Sorry about the smaller size.


Cheers

[Iotayodi]

I like what he did with the high and low pressure scheme. I would think the cold would be the high pressure as its in a contracted state like a coiled spring.

[cplouffe]

I like what he did with the high and low pressure scheme. I would think the cold would be the high pressure as its in a contracted state like a coiled spring.

hot cold
compression expansion
gravitation radiation
concentration decentration
growth decay
life death
polarization depolarization

[R.E.Craig]

I don't think it's a question of stupid. Most professionals are afraid of peer ridicule and rejection. Just look at what happened to Fleischmann and Pons.

[Hrothgar]

God is real enough

But it is mans own arrogance to think that God used mans days before man was even made.

"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. "

[Kytsun]

It's quite documented that, when faced with evidence of a reality differing from their own, a person will often become defensive or more or less violently reject the idea. This is the case for most non-open-minded professionals. The corrupting influence of money explains the rest.