Marko Rodin - Smart Lazer Technology

feedback:





Baryon


[link to en.wikipedia.org]

swinger you got an opinion of nasa`s comment?

When something cannot be seen it may seem prudent to describe it only by its affects, and this is a perfectly reasonable scientific scepticism. The problem arises that this leads to the object being referred to and treated as its affects, which is to ignore cause and effect. This also rules out the possibility of even asking the question: how and why do these effects manifest?.

Rather than attempting to define a model where protons and electrons are treated as real discrete objects that interact with an aethereal field, they are treated as only as associated numerical variables. There are obvious advantages to the mathematical construct approach. However, I am of the firm opinion that the universe is in no way magical and that therefore it is purely and completely physical (some may declare this to be a belief system, I view as an absence of belief system and a sound basis for objectivity). A physical universe must operate by mechanical rules, so probability functions are not a way of describing an object or process, they are a way of avoiding describing an object or process. Do we assume that the proton is an object with physical and interactional properties or do we take it to be the sum of its affects.

Of course we may get ourselves into all sorts of semantic definitional tangles when trying to define the fundamental physical difference between a spoon and the invisible undetectable objects that cause the spoon to experience gravity or magnetism: material/immaterial, matter/aether, etc.. Recently I used the analogy of a sand castle on a beach of sand to compare to an aether particle "photon structure" in an aether particle field. Your tornado/atmosphere analogy is interestingly similar. But is it a valid analogy to describe a proton, does the tornado does not have a stable lifetime of at least 1029 years.

Whoa, this guy is using EM signatures in his work?!

He has to be using his own camera, doesn't he? Sorry, can't listen to vids at work.

"the ufo appears to be trying to communicate with the plane. it actually changes it`s EM signature to match the plane"

sorry I've not been up to date on this thread, lots of reading to catch up on.

can you point out the 'intuitive steering' explanation?

I've had a 'steering' issue come up, maybe a clue to be had.

hey peanut, we will stick with the topic to explain to see how it works

let`s remove the two craft and their occupants from the equation, we are left with the environment they exist within

the environment (universe) both it`s material dimension and non material dimensions, in their structure collectively forms the singular effect labeled by us, "self aware" (intelligent)

the craft referred to as organic is labeled organic because, no matter what materials are used to construct it, it is structured to mimic the singular effect of it`s environment , self aware (intelligent), hence able to utilize the attributes of it`s environment

the occupant whom constructed the craft did so because they first understood the structure and function of our environment hence their craft is steered by the occupant being in intuitive communication with our self aware environment and their craft, simultaneously

the craft responds to both occupant and our environments collective desires within the natural boundaries of the occupants understanding of our environment

I am merely repeating what appears from my reading to be the purpose of introducing a space-time fluid.
The idea basically goes back to Democritus and Leucippus, and further back of course

This space-time, I will use your terminology and call it "aether", is the only thing that exists. There is nothing else. All observed reality can be explained by differing states of this aether at different locations. That's how I understand the theory at least.

Of course at this level it is just hand waving, to make this useful we need to describe some details. What properties of the aether are those we describe as mass? What properties of the aether are those we describe as an electric field? How do they relate, change with time, etc? This is what maxwell's equations and einstein's GR describe.

Perhaps you are looking for a hybrid theory, one in which the electromagnetic aether is a different substance from massive particles which travel through it? Such ideas were voiced by physicists such as Maxwell, and mostly are incompatible with observations such as stellar aberration and the Michelson Morley experiment.

Not on this thread you're not.

false teaching you are promoting

good for you

have a nice day

rainbow stuff I found (not necessarily fact lol) but interesting to think about.

posting here because moon girl can delete postings here





oh what a tangled web