Energy and Polarity

[witsend]

Joit,

Third, i have NO intention, NONE WHAT SO EVER, to debunk this thread.
if corrie feels that i am not welcomed and will ask me to leave,
i'll do just that with no hard feelings or play the idiot like juju did in my thread.

Hi Agent.A. I'm sure we're all interested in everyone's thesis here. But I think the intention in this thread is to find out where Aromaz's thinking takes us? I'm sure that our members of this forum are well able to support alternate view points. Personally I'm very interested in everyone's ideas. They're crucial. I'm sure that most of us subscribe to this energy source. The thing now is to find out what we're subscribing to - is my take.

[juju]

Lol

1. revenge
2. vengeance
3. retribution
4. retaliation
5. comeback
6. sword
7. avengement
8. requital

if that is because of me, do it in my own thread, not in aromaz thread, nobody have to pay for my mistakes!

[Inquorate]

@ agent a - I assume you watched the videos I posted the links to?

Then you would know that this

YouTube - Extended Michelson-Morley Interferometer experiment. English version

Is 'proof' of the aether.

[Agent.A]

@witsend,

...
But I think the intention in this thread is to find out where Aromaz's thinking takes us
...

well, corrie gave some answers in page 1, some in 2, and the rest in 3.
he also said that he will give the rest when the right time comes.

in the mean time, if im not wrong, that leaves the rest of us with time to ask questions,
point to flaws or things we feel thay are right and develop these ideas, exchange knowledge and thoughts and 'BrainStorm'. no ? i got it all wrong ?

this is the process of development if im not mistaken ...

again, i have no reason to 'derail this train' and i find it astonishing that when
the source of any idea/thought/theory is being asked about the response is :
" you are a moron, go figure by yourself"



if this is a closed party, somebody forgot to put the sign 'Closed to OUTSIDERS' in the threads name.

but, since corrie wrote in the very first post,

...
I would like to buy popcorn and coke while (hopefully) watching this devellopment.

if i misunderstood that, well, a moron i am


@CatLady




@Inquorate

every video, reference, pdf, doc, txt, image, WHATEVER, that somebody posted in this forum since 2000,
i've downloaded to my archive to keep and check and watch and learn.
( i mean, of those threads that i've found interesting. LOTs of them are )

so, yes, i watched your videos and i have questions about them,
but, as i've already seen and felt, asking questions here is a tricky business.

[Aromaz]

I appreciate everyone and anyone to contribute.

This morning I first came here, even before my e-mails; was happy to see so many replies and was really hoping to see some constructive input – be it criticism or supporting; instead I found a whole UGLY page #3 of mostly JUNK. In a disturbed mood I am writing this posting.

I am here for serious business and serious experiments; based on theories and hypotheses. Serious – yes as in I have the proof that I invested near US$ 100,000 in material and equipment alone for this issue; no doubt there are not many people on this Alternative Energy issue that can match that.

Could you please remain focused on the issue of this tread? This is not a proof thread; it is after all just a Theory – based on Energy and Polarity.

My aim is to get out from the conventional and see how far we can get with an alternative. After we all worked and pondered this issue constructively, then we can all work together and device new experiments to see how much we can proof.

In reference I would like to see people working together; seriously and supporting. We did it before in “Imhothep Radiant Oscillator”, “Resonance Effects for everyone” and “Aromaz Radiant Energy”.

@Agent.A: I have been reading almost all of your fifty or so postings. Eleven of which are on this thread - and still got to find real constructive material. The majority of your postings are to say the least – insulting – to some people. As such you will find a very comfortable home at OverUnity.com. You cause resentment to yourself. Above postings #64, #68, #70, #73, #73, #78, #84 are proof of that fact. It is not so much in what you are trying to say, but the manner in which you say that. I do not say you have to agree at all; but please do enter constructive statements and leave personal issues for elsewhere.

I have no intensions to ‘moderate’ and such is actually against the whole concept of this respectful Energetic Forum. Please people remain focused on the intended issue of this tread.

Personally I do not need to be here, I am here to share my findings and to consult and expand on knowledge in a constructive manner. Please do not waste my time with junks. Postings like above #64, #68, #69, #71, #72, #75, #76, #77, #82, #84, #85, #87 are not constructive, not welcome and a waste of your time, my time and of everyone that has to read through your junk.

For me, Energetic Forum is a place to relax, share thoughts and ideas, be happy and peaceful together. A community if you like.

Please; CONTRIBUTE, CONSTRUCTIVE, peaceful and friendly.

Let us go on to Page #4 and start working together in peace please?

[Jbignes5]

Alrighty then!

There you have it.

Now that we have that cleared up lets do it!

Aromaz have you read my theory here? I wanted to know from you where it might have gone wrong in your eyes?

[Aromaz]

Reply #4

LOL It seems that everyone has their own ideas about this. But to get back to Aromaz's ideas - I think your introduction to the topic is very well written and very thought provoking.

Still not sure how you see that first energy and I rather sympathise with Agent.A's argument. Is that first 'energy' just a jumble of little photons? How else do they manifest as photons? In other words, what brings the photon into being as an identifiable spherically shaped piece matter from 'nothing'. To me that's the question that is more to the point. What comes from the void to materialise into anything at all?

I can see how they would materialise provided that the energy itself is material. Maybe just a very small value of the photon itself?

First, in my theory as above we have to differentiate between the PURE ENERGY of the origin and that which we today accept as energy. The original energy release from the Big Bang is what I today see as the possible Aether or Dark Energy. Since we do neither understand nor are we able to define it properly; we have to theorize around that.

In review of the BigBang; we all accept the origin of our Universe was a small miniscule blob of unified energy. Conventional science says it was unified Electro, Magnetic, Weak and Strong Nuclear. All in one, all compressed. So how come they suddenly had particles upon the Big Bang? Particles cannot be compressed, not even Protons.

If the energy release at the moment of BigBang was the four pillars as above; then where do the Dark Matter come from? How come Black holes are in operation? The universe should have been formed and remained the same volume/mass of material. We do know this is not true. There are then more unanswerable questions. Maybe the idea we have that the Atom is forever in existence is wrong. Maybe the idea of atom remaining at it energized cycle is wrong. How is it possible that the atom can have this continues (OverUnity) rotation unlimited and not slow down?

I propose it was not a unified energy; I propose it was such a pure form that we today cannot even imagine. The moment of BigBang released this energy and it is filling and expanding our universe. So if my theory is right we should eventually be able to find a continued cycle of creation and destruction. The cycle never stopped and will for always continue until the universe comes to a halt; if ever.

Since we cannot go back to the very origin, maybe we can catch up at the turn around point and then try to follow the cycle backwards through the Degenerating stage. What happens to ‘particles’ released from the atom? Where does the electron, proton, neutron, et all go when the atom dissipates? Do they remainthe same, do they change?

Let me review what I propose as evolution – in very shortcut way:

Growing Cycle:
Dark energy has the formation of blobs of cyclonic rotating energy within, these building up in strength and eventually got so strong it can manifest as if particle – Electron. Electrons merge with photons and other electrons, become more energetic and form Atoms – Atoms binds and forms molecules. Now we do have physical matter.

Degenerating Cycle:
These molecules will eventually break down back to Atoms. Atoms all the time release part of the lower energy units and gets re-charged with new energy units (Photons/Electrons) – but eventually the atom will get so weak it dissipate. Now we are back at photons; photons slows down and eventually cycle back into the Dark energy.

The complete cycle starts all over again.

[Aromaz]

. . .Aromaz have you read my theory here? I wanted to know from you where it might have gone wrong in your eyes?

Nothing has gone wrong. All are theory, none with concrete proof; therefore everyone is equally right.

That said; in comparison with my theory we do have a problem. Yours is based on the issue that gravity, polarity and particle are present. Me on the other hand propose they were not there from the beginning; had to come into existence from an energy source we only recently discovered as being 'most likely' to exist and to be the most abundance in the Universe.

Unless I understood your question wrong?

[Aromaz]

Provoking thought

The formation and workings of Photons and the evolution from photon to physical matter and back to dissipated energy - IF ever we can reach a proper understanding – and suitable experiments of this concept;

We would also have on our hands the understanding of how to tap into this universal energy supply and utilize that without any limitation or end. Not only that, but we would be able to build crafts that are not restricted by gravity nor fuel source. Unfortunately some people would also build weapons beyond that we can imagine.

Is it possible at all? Well, I think it should be much easier than creating a new life form?
See the latest news on Dr. Venter and Co. with their 'Man-Made-DNA'
Did people not always said it would never be possible; well until March this year when the impossible became reality.

Why are our ALTERNATIVE energy devellopment so far behind?

[witsend]

First, in my theory as above we have to differentiate between the PURE ENERGY of the origin and that which we today accept as energy. The original energy release from the Big Bang is what I today see as the possible Aether or Dark Energy. Since we do neither understand nor are we able to define it properly; we have to theorize around that.

Here aether theories and dark energy are a little bit at variance. Our mainstream scientists are looking for a particle that may be the basis of dark energy. But it is proposed that the particle may be a boson - which, like the photon, has an integer spin and is not subject to the exclusion principle. Here's the problem. If it is a boson then in all other aspects it does not conform to the standard model of particle physics. It does not reflect light nor emit light. It is only evident through gravitational lensing. And yet - to account for the 'hidden mass' of galaxies - it is required that there is something like ten times more of this hidden mass than is evident in the actual mass of those galaxies. Then to compound this problem - space itself would need to comprise about 96% of this energy which also implies that even more of this particle is extant in space and would possibly shape space itself.

If, as you seem to suggest, our aether is fundamental to the particle, be it photons, electrons, protons or neutrons or even neutrinos, then space would comprise this aether energy that has nothing to do with the dark matter that mainstream propose.

The only physicists that have proved dark energy - or something relating to dark energy - are our string theorists as Cat has suggested. But they see this as a kind of form structure - like structured scaffolding - that holds matter bound inside that structure. But that matter is proposed to be arbitrarily amassed - which leaves many questions relating to the apparently predictable behaviour of matter. In other words they see it as a static field that does not afford a causal link between the behaviour of particles. They're still looking for that link.

I think what we're all referring to as this aether energy field is something that is dynamic or active and that it is, itself, responsible for the energy that we see and use in matter. What I am asking you is this. Could it be that the photon - which you correctly see as the fundamental particle - could it be that it, itself, comprises composites of an even more fundamental aether particle? Just a thought?

[witsend]

Big Bangs

The 'Big Bang' theory is actually not a theory at all. It's a proposal. And there is a growing number of physicsts who do not subscribe to this. The 'growth' of stars and star systems have been recorded from nebulae. Our astrophysicists have actually recorded the emergence of stars from nebulae. It may well have been the origin of our own galaxy. In other words it is equally possible that something formed nebulae out of the vacuum and such nebulae are the source of all matter.

This, in turn, would suggest that the origin of matter did not require that first 'big bang'. Matter may not therefore need to emanate from any such event.

[witsend]

Expanding Space

If space is expanding - and that at PACE - then it would be impossible for two galaxies to 'merge'. Galaxial collisions have been seen - often. It can be argued that their velocities exceed the rate of expansion. But that is contradictory. If the proposal that their trajectory through space is determined by the expansion of space then one must assume that the rate of their trajectory through space is determined by that rate of expansion. Otherwise - if their trajectory through space is determined by their own velocities then they are NOT moving as a result of the expansion of space.

[witsend]

Here's a picture of a nebula - The Creation.

[sucahyo]

No one want to differentiate between energy that is useable for us and energy that don't? measureable and unmerasureable?



@Aromaz, your photon is different from the photon of a laser?

here his simplest experiments that can proof that an atom can be at more then one place at the same time, and that the reality behaves in accordance to the observer.

i cannot find the experiment of the 2 shooting electrons in oppose direction, one of them passing a magnet, and both will change in same direction... i will send you soon i find it...

Double slit experiment:

YouTube - The Infamous Double Slit Experiment

YouTube - Double Slit Expr.

While juju believe atom is in two places at once, I think the experiment shows that the photon move in a longitudinal way, not tranversal, so it is not scalar.

[witsend]

No one want to differentiate between energy that is useable for us and energy that don't? measureable and unmerasureable?

? Not sure of your point here sucahyo.