Have you seen physicist Sabine Hossenfelder's latest video: youtu.be/shFUDPqVmTg ? She reads from an email she received from a high energy physicist in response to Hossenfelder’s classic article, ‘Science needs reason to be trusted’. This anonymous physicist doesn’t deny Sabine’s claims that modern physics is a house of cards that has no bearing on the real world, but that the establishment physicists need to feed their families and that’s what matters! Read other scientists’ comments in the youtube video, which is at over 2.3 million views in 9 days. The opposite of science is conscience, which that anonymous guy needs. We cut up things into little subcategories and don’t see the big picture. What a time to be alive, all the things being upturned.
Brendan I would love to get your thoughts on the electrical universe and how that ties in with other theories flat earth, firmament etc. as you allude to with the comment, Copernicus was off the mark, but I’ll deal with that another time, since it needs some context.
I believe the electric universe model shows how a sphere is created (Earth) by 2 cone shaped magnetic fields drawing in different density materials at different layers for example.
Hey, Andrew, thanks! I'm not aware of any physics theories (or conjectures) that account for the potential formation of a flat body in space (and I find it highly odd ppl have become so polarised against that last term, but I digress). I would lean in the direction of the torus model ("two pinecones kissing," as Winter says) and implosion physics to account for the formation of any of the observable bodies in "space" (which I highly doubt are *all* faked, and none of which seem to be flat, oddly enough).
So many ppl have so many competing ideas around this and, honestly, it's an area that has attracted so much batshit crazy commentary I tend to not want to get involved. "Firmament" is a classic example: certain people reading it as "dome" because it suits their silly religious beliefs. *eye roll*
It's just an old word for sky....
Anyway, I have a fever and am probably not overly useful right now so I'll stop, but thanks for commenting.
Have you seen physicist Sabine Hossenfelder's latest video: youtu.be/shFUDPqVmTg ? She reads from an email she received from a high energy physicist in response to Hossenfelder’s classic article, ‘Science needs reason to be trusted’. This anonymous physicist doesn’t deny Sabine’s claims that modern physics is a house of cards that has no bearing on the real world, but that the establishment physicists need to feed their families and that’s what matters! Read other scientists’ comments in the youtube video, which is at over 2.3 million views in 9 days. The opposite of science is conscience, which that anonymous guy needs. We cut up things into little subcategories and don’t see the big picture. What a time to be alive, all the things being upturned.
Here's Alexander Unzicker’s take https://youtu.be/SMTmnOx7RrA
Great article, the is more information on the electrical universe at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_azwSFaVcNk
Brendan I would love to get your thoughts on the electrical universe and how that ties in with other theories flat earth, firmament etc. as you allude to with the comment, Copernicus was off the mark, but I’ll deal with that another time, since it needs some context.
I believe the electric universe model shows how a sphere is created (Earth) by 2 cone shaped magnetic fields drawing in different density materials at different layers for example.
Hey, Andrew, thanks! I'm not aware of any physics theories (or conjectures) that account for the potential formation of a flat body in space (and I find it highly odd ppl have become so polarised against that last term, but I digress). I would lean in the direction of the torus model ("two pinecones kissing," as Winter says) and implosion physics to account for the formation of any of the observable bodies in "space" (which I highly doubt are *all* faked, and none of which seem to be flat, oddly enough).
So many ppl have so many competing ideas around this and, honestly, it's an area that has attracted so much batshit crazy commentary I tend to not want to get involved. "Firmament" is a classic example: certain people reading it as "dome" because it suits their silly religious beliefs. *eye roll*
It's just an old word for sky....
Anyway, I have a fever and am probably not overly useful right now so I'll stop, but thanks for commenting.
Great article . Thanks for sharing
Dewey lasrson. Reciprocal theory also always fascinated me. A diff view how science could be
Yes! I actually used his ideas in Book 1, as it happens. :)
Thanks, by the way!
Thanks for posting this info about the EU. I, and countless others, dearly miss Wal and appreciate his insights and contributions to humanity.