Anti-gravity

[p75213]

This may be of interest https://www.blacklistednews.com/arti...nese-tech.html

[vidbid]

Reification

Reification Fallacy

(also known as: abstraction, concretism, fallacy of misplaced concreteness, hypostatisation)

Description: When an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete, real event or physical entity -- when an idea is treated as if had a real existence.

Example #1:

It's time to grab my future by the balls.

Explanation: The future is an abstraction. It does not have testicles. If it did, you probably wouldn't want to grab them because your future might sue you for sexual misconduct.

Example #2:

If you are open to it, love will find you.

Explanation: Love is an abstraction, not a little fat flying baby with a bow and arrow that searches for victims. Cute sayings such as this one can serve as bad advice for people who would otherwise make an effort to find a romantic partner, but choose not to, believing that this "love entity" is busy searching for his or her ideal mate.

[spacecase0]

This may be of interest https://www.blacklistednews.com/arti...nese-tech.html

thank you for posting,
it is interesting they patent them now

[aljhoa]

What are you trying to discuss?

1. Religion

2. Pseudoscience

3. Science

No, in the Aether's Field and anti-gravity thread,
what are YOU VIDBID trying to discuss:
hypostatization fallacy, flat earth, MGTOW,
anti-gravity or something else?


Al

[vidbid]

What are you trying to discuss?

1. Religion

2. Pseudoscience

3. Science

If discussing science, you must use the scientific method; otherwise, if the scientific method can't be employed, it's only pseudoscience.

No

1. Are you trying to discuss religion?
2. Are you trying to discuss pseudoscience?
3. Are you trying to discuss science?

Answering "No" is incorrect. The correct answer is Science.

What's a field?

Define a field.

What was first, the idea of an Aether field or the idea of the Aether?

Wasn't the idea of the Aether first?

Why do you want to know about the Aether?

Didn't Einstein, your god, tell you the Aether doesn't exist?

Why don't you believe your god, Einstein?

Are you wanting to know about something that your god, Einstein, says doesn't exist?

So, you want to know about the Aether?

Why?

What good would it do you?

You just want to know, don't you?

I could tell you about an experiment that was performed after the Michelson–Morley experiment that proved the existence of the Aether, but why would I do that?

Give me one good reason why I should help you?

First, you must do something for me.

I will only tell you if you can show me one post (not including this one) in this thread wherein I mentioned the term MGTOW. I want the post number.

If you can't do that, then I won't help you.

[vidbid]

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qJoRNseyLQ[/VIDEO]

The claim is the Aether doesn't exist, according to Einstein.

Right?

So, shouldn't you believe what your gods say?

Isn't it blasphemy to doubt your gods?

.

[vidbid]

Thinker or Believer

The Michelson–Morley experiment begs the question of an Earth in motion, does it not?

Not only does it beg the question, the experiment reifies the Earth in motion fallacy.

Then Einstein locked down the Michelson–Morley experiment's fallacious interpretation of the results of the experiment by declaring the non-existence of the Aether with the Theory of General Relativity, published in 1915. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity

Einstein had to declare the non-existence of the Aether; because not to have done so would have left open the question of the immobility of the Earth, and they couldn't have that, now could they?

They had two choices from the experiment.

It's either

Option 1. the Earth is NOT in motion, or

Option 2. there is no Aether.

One or the other, but not both.

They chose there is no Aether.

Then another experiment came out later that removed the issue of Option 1 and concluded the existence of the Aether. That experiment was buried and hidden from the public.

I know the name of that experiment.

Do you?

The powers that be have to keep you believing that you are on a spinning ball hurtling through space, that you're an accident, that you're alone and forgotten, that you're inconsequential and insignificant.

Do you know why?

What if you weren't on a spinning ball hurtling through space?

What if the Earth wasn't really in motion?

What if the Earth was stationary?

What might be the possible implications of that?

Might you start to believe that you weren't an accident?

What could that lead to?

Might you start to question the narrative that you were taught to believe from the age of a child?

Remember the globe in the classroom?

Remember being taught evolution in class?

If you start to question that the Earth is revolving and in motion, might you start to question that humans evolved from lower life forms?

Might you begin to question your place in the universe?

And, if it is really a universe?

What if you're just in some big, fancy terrarium?

Then who created it?

Might you even start to believe in a Creator?

Do you see why you're supposed to keep believing that your on a spinning ball hurtling through space and that you evolved from bacteria?

Control.

Control to keep you right where you are.

A good little wage slave.

Are you a thinker or a believer?

A thinker questions. A believer doesn't. A believer simply accepts what he's been told.

Are you a thinker or a believer?

.

Correction:

[vidbid]

Sagnac experiment

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWmlimH7laY[/VIDEO]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagnac_effect

[aljhoa]

Sagnac's experiment proved the existence of the aether, thus demolishing Einstein's Theory of Relativity.

MGTOW - your future might sue you for sexual misconduct

MGTOW - people who would otherwise make an effort to find a romantic partner, but choose not to,

\0f the talcing up of Enoch ; how the Angels took him up
into the first heaveti^

III. I. It came to pass when I^ had spoken to my sons,
* these men * * summoned me and ^ took me on their wing-s ^
and placed me * on the clouds ". * And lo ! the clouds moved ^.
2. *And ag-ain (g-oing-) higher I saw the air and (going* still)
higher I saw the ether ^, and they placed me in the first
heaven. 3. * And they showed me a very great sea, greater
than the earthly sea '^^.
https://archive.org/stream/bookofsec...0morf_djvu.txt

Einstein 1920 talk on the Aether

Al

[vidbid]

..talcing up of Enoch..

Falsifying a quote won't work.

Anyhow, it's Sagnac, and it's where we get the ring laser gyroscope, which uses the Sagnac effect.

By the way, the canonicity of the Book of Enoch is in question. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch

"Enoch, the seventh from Adam" is quoted, in Jude 1:14–15.

However, it is Enoch, not the Book of Enoch, that is quoted in Jude 1:14–15, so that is part of the confusion.

14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

The above verses refer to when the Lord returns and what he's going to do when he gets here.

[vidbid]

Einstein 1920 talk on the Aether

That is from segment of a free energy video. Naturally, they want Aether to be true.

Albert Einstein gave an address on 5 May 1920 at the University of Leiden. He chose as his topic Ether and the Theory of Relativity. He lectured in German but we present an English translation below. The lecture was published by Methuen & Co. Ltd, London, in 1922. Einstein: "Ether and Relativity"

...
The next position which it was possible to take up in face of this state of things appeared to be the following. The ether does not exist at all. The electromagnetic fields are not states of a medium, and are not bound down to any bearer, but they are independent realities which are not reducible to anything else, exactly like the atoms of ponderable matter. This conception suggests itself the more readily as, according to Lorentz's theory, electromagnetic radiation, like ponderable matter, brings impulse and energy with it, and as, according to the special theory of relativity, both matter and radiation are but special forms of distributed energy, ponderable mass losing its isolation and appearing as a special form of energy.

More careful reflection teaches us however, that the special theory of relativity does not compel us to deny ether. We may assume the existence of an ether; only we must give up ascribing a definite state of motion to it, i.e. we must by abstraction take from it the last mechanical characteristic which Lorentz had still left it. We shall see later that this point of view, the conceivability of which I shall at once endeavour to make more intelligible by a somewhat halting comparison, is justified by the results of the general theory of relativity.
...

00:49
example in michelson-morley experiment
00:53
which presumed to be in experiments on
00:56
the either the confirmation or the
00:59
denial of the existence of the ether was
01:01
certainly no denial as I am yet modern
01:04
science quote-unquote seems to rely upon
01:07
that as a proof that the ether doesn't
01:10
exist yet

Reference:

https://youtu.be/HewSdyqbX0U?t=50

Let's check that out:

According to the general theory of relativity space without Aether is unthinkable

That might be the official word, now. But is there acceptance of it?

This does not mean that it is widely accepted - not at all. It is simply ignored by the scientific mainstream. But it exists, and ignorance is not an argument.

So this quote corroborates what Wheeler said about the Aether not being widely accepted in modern science.

Generally, the Aether is not accepted by the scientific community.

I prefer to refer to many in the scientific community as the pseudoscientific community if they deny the existence of the Aether.

The Sagnac experiment proved that the Aether exists.

The Michelson–Morley experiment proved that the Earth is motionless.

[vidbid]

The Sagnac experiment proved that the Aether exists.

The Michelson–Morley experiment proved that the Earth is motionless.

How is that so?

Simple logic.

The initial purpose of the MM experiment was to prove the existence of the Aether, only their experiment had built into it the presupposition of a rotating Earth or a Earth in motion.

Just consider the converse, if the Earth isn't rotating or isn't in motion, no Aether can be detected because there is no movement to cause a differential phase shift in the MM apparatus.

But in the Sagnac experiment, the base of the MM table is freely rotated, so Aether was detected because there was differential phase shift. Hence, the basis for a ring laser gyroscope.

Therefore, if the Aether exists, MM proved that the Earth is not moving.

The Earth does not move. PERIOD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel...ley_experiment

"which rules out a stationary aether" is the wrong conclusion. Sagnac proved that the Aether exists; therefore, what is stationary is the Earth.

With no motion of the Earth, there wouldn't be any differential phase shift between light traveling the longitudinal versus the transverse arms of the Michelson–Morley apparatus.

Why can't you all understand that?

[vidbid]

Notice in this video there is no mention of the Sagnac experiment.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZUHyN_NCaQ[/VIDEO]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZUHyN_NCaQ

Compare that to a ring laser gyroscope, which is based on the Sagnac effect.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iHkIoBomm8[/VIDEO]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iHkIoBomm8

[vidbid]

Sagnac Interferometer

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIEbDm0QwG8[/VIDEO]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIEbDm0QwG8

[aljhoa]

The Sagnac experiment proved that the Aether exists.

https://imgur.com/gallery/5YOi5WK
https://i.imgur.com/5YOi5WK.gifv

The Michelson–Morley experiment proved that the Earth is motionless.

Since the Flat Earth is accelerating at 9.8m/s**2,
VIDBID (or anyone), how far will it travel in four (4) years?

How is that so?

Simple logic.

https://www.theprinciplemovie.com/wp...arth-Mover.pdf


Al