WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!

I have a question for the solar savvy. I've not been the only one paying attention to the weirdness of the sun lately. I suspect it's even causing some physical symptoms but that's not my question.

I have a little solar 'dancing sunflower' on my desk at work. I have recessed flourescent lights and a compact fleurescent lamp on my desk. There is no sunlight. Generally it doesn't dance but only manages a twitch under these conditions but today it's going faster. I have no idea what wavelengths it responds to and no sophisticated comprehension of solar events but what could come through a metal building with complete cloud cover to increase its movement?

I have a question for the solar savvy. I've not been the only one paying attention to the weirdness of the sun lately. I suspect it's even causing some physical symptoms but that's not my question.

I have a little solar 'dancing sunflower' on my desk at work. I have recessed flourescent lights and a compact fleurescent lamp on my desk. There is no sunlight. Generally it doesn't dance but only manages a twitch under these conditions but today it's going faster. I have no idea what wavelengths it responds to and no sophisticated comprehension of solar events but what could come through a metal building with complete cloud cover to increase its movement?

“If your hate could be turned into electricity, it would light up the whole world.”
― Nikola Tesla

most of the posters replies on this thread could light up los vagas for a night...

idws replies could launch a lightspeed starship...

and power it for generations...

:-(

Good god. Talk about debasing the thread (surely not intentional?). Dancing fecking sunflowers......sorry Flappage....I mean Flapping! No offence intended!

No one has ever attempted to disqualify this theory, though it is falsifiable hundreds of different ways experimentally.

H30 IS in fact an ion of the water molecule. It has an extra proton giving it a positive charge, and it meets the definition of an ion.

However, a proton is a sub atomic particle and the H+ designation represents what is supposed to be both an proton and a positive ion of hydrogen. This is incorrect. An ion is defined as a charged atom or molecule and a proton as a sub atomic particle. Sub atomic means it is not a complete atom. The concentration of H3O ions in water determines the PH of the water, but an un bonded proton IS NOT AN ION.


This dumbing down is intentional.

As most of you who have a certain level of intelligence and who received a traditional academic 'education' as a science major probably noticed, there are endless discrepancies and inconsistencies taught in the various disciplines.

As a prime example, in chemistry when one writes a balanced equation of an oxidation reduction reaction, the electromagnetic energy given off in the form of heat and light MUST be represented by an electron symbol, there are NO PHOTONS IN CHEMISTRY.

But when you cross the hall to physics lecture, the energy released in such a reaction MUST be described as photons. The photon was postulated out of thin air with no evidence to explain (without actually doing so) the wave/particle duality paradox of light.

BUT, it is an inescapable fact that the 'photon' defies the basic laws of physics by possessing energy and momentum without mass. This is simply not possible Mass and relative motion are BOTH components of Kinetic energy and momentum, this is basic PROVED physics.

The theory I wrote, "The Electromechanical Theory of Electromagnetic Radiation" , explains not only the wave/particle duality paradox of light succinctly, it also provides simple mathematical equations that explain why the higher frequencies of electromagnetic energy (known generically as light in physics regardless of frequency) can transmit more energy at equal amplitudes.

No one has ever attempted to disqualify this theory, though it is falsifiable hundreds of different ways experimentally.

A goal I set for myself before my death was to dethrone the fraudulent "God Of Science", Albert Einstein.
Unfortunately, I have met with an organized conspiracy to systematically suppress any theory which would provide a real, uncomplicated disqualification of quantum physics and its origin, special and general relativity, both of which are complex nonsense fictions that are self disqualifying by the many unexplained paradoxes they produce and the fact that no consensus whatsoever exists among even two people in the world on what these theories actually mean.


I believe this to be the result of the placement of Jewish gatekeepers in both academic and publishing positions who systematically suppress, oppress, and in some cases kill individuals who attempt to expose this huge fraud. The purpose isn't really all of that hard to understand, as long as this un-penetrable stumbling block exists, the human race will remain enslaved.

For those of you who doubt what I have just told you, I suggest you read about Nicola Tesla. This man is the father of ALL MODERN ELECTRONICS, and goes completely unrecognized because he was a 'Gentile" Serbian. You will frequently hear jews claim modern computers and such were made possible by quantum physics, but they can't explain how and the truth is every single component in it that makes it work was developed by Nicola Tesla.


Despite the magnificent advancements he made in the world of electronics and empiricism based science in general, he died penniless and government goons seized his work and whisked it away.

Some day my theories will be recognized as fact, and Nicola Tesla recognized as the true father of modern scientific achievement, but it's going to take a revolution to remove Jewish gatekeepers permanently and this is what will free the human race from its current bondage empowered by deception and oppression of truth.

THIS COMPLETES MY RAVE FOR TONIGHT

Doh. Take 2.



Carefully and completely spell out five different experiments that would specifically falsify and disqualify your theory.

And watch my surprise when you can't.

Well, wouldn't it be useful if an inexpensive toy was able to detect incoming radiation. At least I'm not bashing anybody or posing as a 'sexual intellectual' ( an Fing know-it-all)

Doh. Take 2.



Carefully and completely spell out five different experiments that would specifically falsify and disqualify your theory.

And watch my surprise when you can't.

Doh. Take 2.



Carefully and completely spell out five different experiments that would specifically falsify and disqualify your theory.

And watch my surprise when you can't.

It is generally more difficult to prove a negative, to prove something false, than to prove it true. (at least till Dec.21st comes around in this case)

So I would have to disagree with AA here too, I doubt that people have falsified, or proved his theory false, and in hundreds of way no less.

Just my 26 centavos. Good try AA, but you can't debunk yourself that easy. Try giving us some real proof, just 5 examples like 74444 says, that your theories are false.

Either that, or VERIfy your theory in 5 ways, rather than FALSIfy it in 5 ways.

:tootless:

1)Prove the production of electricity from a photovoltaic cell is not the result of electrons in the form of light being intercepted by the atomic structure of the photovoltaic material and converted to normal low electrons. (By the way, the function of photovoltaic cells is most succinctly explained by my theory)

2)Prove that light frequency energy cannot be conducted by the same materials as electricity in the non EMR form. Radio antennae and wires being used to conduct EMR are in almsot every electronic device, and are conductors of electrons. Repeated experiments mentioned in early debates involving plants producing photosynthesis in total darkness using metal plates and conductors will get in your way though,as well

3)Prove that the energy of electromagnetic radiation is not directly related to it's velocity, speed amplitude and frequency, in other words prove that the particle I suggest is not moving the precise distance and velocity to produce the energy it does using the classic 1/2M X V2 formula. (I give the simple math proving this in my theorem)

4)Prove that and momentum can exist without mass

5)Isolate and fully describe the "photon"


Agent, I could go on an on and on if you wish.

None of those experiments seem to *prove YOUR theory.* These experiments seem to be about disproving the mainstream theories. And, in fact, they aren't experiments at all. Your attempts at disqualification of the mainstream theory (which is a classic argument from ignorance) have nothing to do with experimentally verifying YOUR theories. The closest you got was with plants, in #2.

You are the one proposing the idea. Propose with each of the above a specific experiment that will be explained and predicted by your theory, and if the experiment fails, will FALSIFY your theory. Do you understand? Can you?

agent 74444, what do you do for a living? what job do you have?

I told you. I work in I.T. for a private firm.

None of those experiments seem to *prove YOUR theory.* These experiments seem to be about disproving the mainstream theories. And, in fact, they aren't experiments at all. Your attempts at disqualification of the mainstream theory (which is a classic argument from ignorance) have nothing to do with experimentally verifying YOUR theories. The closest you got was with plants, in #2.

You are the one proposing the idea. Propose with each of the above a specific experiment that will be explained and predicted by your theory, and if the experiment fails, will FALSIFY your theory. Do you understand? Can you?

I told you. I work in I.T. for a private firm.

...................

you have never told me as I have never asked you before.

& what economic camp are you in? deflationista or inflationista.....?? or in other words, dollar is king or metals are king??

You asked for me to provide five methods of disqualifying my theory, and any one of these will do.

You obviously know nothing of the scientific process.

As the "Mexican" shill pointed out, it is very difficult to prove a negative, thus quantum theory is still be tacked onto with gaudy science fiction

You're goddamned shit breathed liar.

No. Very specifically I wrote: Carefully and completely spell out five different experiments that would specifically falsify and disqualify your theory. Can you propose any

You obviously know nothing of the scientific process.

At least as much as you do, apparently.

As the "Mexican" shill pointed out, it is very difficult to prove a negative, thus quantum theory is still be tacked onto with gaudy science fiction

It is difficult to prove a negative. However, it is possible to create experiments that WILL FAIL if conditions are not met,

and thus allow the idea in question to be falsified/modified. For example, if you stick to the Newtonian F=G(M1*M2)/R^2 (as you seem to want to do), and use it to account for the bending of light in a gravitational field, you only yield about half the result of what is actually observed.

See? Falsifiability. Can you propose specific experiments that allow YOUR idea to be falsified?

You're goddamned shit breathed liar.

I have no reason to be dishonest about what I do for a living, even if I am somewhat reticent about revealing any more about my identity. And, as usual, when challenged to *prove* that I am lying, by stating who I am and who my father was (as you claim to know), *you're* the one who balks.

Which is exactly what you have claimed engineers would do when challenged about the ascent stage of Apollo, by the by. Yet I see you balking with so much more frequency...

Alas, I am not lying about my profession.
/quote]
Yes you are, specifically you work for the NSA and post out of pine gap Australia.I have known you for over ten years. I know who and what you are, a goddamned traitor and a disgrace.

You don't know shit about internet technology and if you do you are using it to hack loyal American citizens.

As I recall the ascent stage reaching orbit with the stated mass to fuel ratio was determined to be impossible soon after NASA published the mass of the fuel and the spacecraft by a wide variety of physics students, and at the time of the missions that the majority of adults both educated and uneducated believed them to be hoax. Try to tell me I am liar or have a poor memory.