Tesla,Velikovsky and the Fraud of Science

That science is merely suppositions and obfuscation is obvious if one considers reality.
The standard model is now considered finished with the “discovery” of the higg boson particle.
http://www.mnn.com/green-tech/research-innovations/stories/higgs-boson-confirms-reigning-physics-model-yet-again

The nobel prize was given to higgs and englert for this discovery. But keep in mind that this same august body gave obama a peace prize for ranging an unending war. Here the august body game a prize for spending $ 12 billion to find sub atomic debris. They did not find a particle but the debris of a particle that must be the higg boson.
So the standard model is enshrined.

But interestingly the standard model can not explain certain physical conditions that everyone alive experiences very moment.

As my allegation may be seen as ignorant and outlandish in light of the intimate contact we have with technology, I will make a point that all we have to agree shows the ignorance of science.

Most of us have dealt with a flat bike tire. And while fixing it, surely we have all noticed that if one spins the wheel in your hands, the tire exerts a right angle force that allows one to support the tire on one finger. As long as the wheel spins it will remain horizontal and spin around the remaining finger. The rotation creates a force that holds the axles level. But if you want to stop the wheel from revolving around you finger, one must gasp both ends of the wheel axle and hold it steady.
Any rotating body that has mass creates these forces, by Newton’s laws of motion. the more massive the object, the greater the rotations force created. Every day we see the sun go across the sky and the seasons come and go with the steady, fixed orientation of the rotations axis of the earth. The problem is that for these constant movements of the earth to exist, there must be forces that hold the axis steady. If one places a rotating object in a vacuum, it will tumble thru space.
The spontaneous response is Gravity is doing it is keeping the axis fixed in place.. But that is not even close. Gravity is said to result in the planets motion around the sun, but the rotation of the planets have nothing to do with gravity.
No one knows why the planets are revolving. gravity didn’t do it.
So we all feel the steady motion of the earth, but for this to be. there must be a exterior force holding the earth’s axis steady.

Yet ,unbelievably, Science has no answer, in fact Science does not even ask the question. Because the answer must be hidden to conceal the secret of the black magician powers .

The only explanation ever given was an nebulous statement by Ernst mach. He said the every star in the universe is “holding” the axis’s ,of all the planets and stars in the universe, steady.
This is pure conjecture; it has no connection to any known forces. But Einstein coined the term the “mach affect”. But you will be hard pressed to find this in any scientific book .

So the question remains unanswered, what holds the rotational axis of the earth fixed.
Such a big omission in the standard model is hard to comprehend.
This is an example of the Mirrors of Science. One can not believe that science does not have a answer but they do not..
I didn’t figure this out , I read a paper http://teslasociety.com/biography.htm


in this article he calculated the immense rotational forces existing from the earth’s rotation. And then pointed out that scientist ignore this conundrum.
I had to read the article 2-3 times before I realized the simplicity of the scientific omission, he had pointed out.
So science is in fact concealing the most primal dynamics in our world.

Emmnuael velikovsky pointed out the missing celestial dynamic:the electrical fields of the planets and stars.
http://velikovsky.org/en/velikovsky.html
http://varchive.org/




the rotation energies of all the planets and stars is totally ignored by science. there is enough rotational energy existant to provide the missing dark energy. but scientist do not want to focus on a source of free energy, so they come jup with yet another hypothetic energy .


Emmanuel velikovsky pointed out the missing celestial dynamic: the electrical fields of the planets and stars. His theories have been validated with by space probes thru the years, yet the “itelligentsia” , dismisses his work.understanably as he overturns, newton ,Darwin, Einstein and shows the intellectual blind spots of archeology and history. Velikovsky single handedly disclosed the falscity and manipulation of the archeological/historical records.
the magnetic fields of the planets and sun are the forces that orders the universe, just as electrical fields order the world of atoms and sub atomic particle. The affect produced on light by a “gravitation” field and on light produced by an electromagnetic field cannot be distinguished. Both are defined by inverse square mathematical equations I have emphasized repeatedly the glaring omission of scientist to look at the causes for the stability of the earth axis. clearly the editors of history do not want this dynamic included in modern scientific theories as this would reveal the true source of the energies underlying our reality.
It may seem like a simple matter, but recent discoveries are beginning to show the true strength of the rotation of the earth.
The alternating current of our electrical system was called, by it’s inventor.nikolai tesla, a rotating magnetic field system. it is the rotation of the earth that gives the electrical force. Scientist had recently noted that relativistic particles are generated in the van Allen belts. At first scientist thought these near light speed particles had to have come from beyond the solar system. Then recently they noted that these particles were being accelerated in the van allen belt. The problem was where was the van allen belt getting the immense energy to raise these particles to near light speed.
Now they have found out that the magnetic field of the earth’ rotation is the force accelerating these relativistic particles. No scientist thought that the earth’s relatively slow rotation speed could cause these charged particles to form. Yet that is exactly what is happening. they have come up with new theories but still where the energy is coming from eludes them.
The affects Einstein gives to gravity are illusionary, a singularity is illusionary ,black holes are illusionary just as steph hawkens, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes-9085016.html
the dean of black holes has determined. Gravity is a mathematical mirror to hide the power of the electromagnetic fields of the earth and sun.
I have emphasized repeatedly the glaring omission of scientist to look at the causes for the stability of the earth axis. clearly the editors of history do not want this dynamic included in modern scientific theories as this would reveal the true source of the energies underlying our reality.
It may seem like a simple matter, but recent discoveries are beginning to show the true strength of the rotation of the earth.

rahu

now it seems the higgs boson discovery didnt clarify anything, rather uncovered more issues.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/god-particle-teaches-that-universe-should-have-ceased-to-exist.html

"Confirmation of the Higgs boson’s existence in July 2012 did not actually add clarity to the general picture of our Universe after all. The information acquired raised new, even more complex, questions.
Physicists at King’s College in London claim they have recreated the conditions following the Big Bang, but this time using the new information acquired with the help of the LHC. British scientists maintain now that the new data related to the so-called ‘God particle’ suggests the universe should have expanded excessively fast after the Big Bang and collapsed billions of years ago."

“We have to extend our theories to explain why this didn’t happen,” Hogan said.


well ,at least we do know the going rate for a nobel prize is 11 billion dollars.

rahu

Most of us have dealt with a flat bike tire. And while fixing it, surely we have all noticed that if one spins the wheel in your hands, the tire exerts a right angle force that allows one to support the tire on one finger. As long as the wheel spins it will remain horizontal and spin around the remaining finger. The rotation creates a force that holds the axles level. But if you want to stop the wheel from revolving around you finger, one must gasp both ends of the wheel axle and hold it steady.
Any rotating body that has mass creates these forces, by Newton’s laws of motion. the more massive the object, the greater the rotations force created. Every day we see the sun go across the sky and the seasons come and go with the steady, fixed orientation of the rotations axis of the earth. The problem is that for these constant movements of the earth to exist, there must be forces that hold the axis steady. If one places a rotating object in a vacuum, it will tumble thru space.
The spontaneous response is Gravity is doing it is keeping the axis fixed in place.. But that is not even close. Gravity is said to result in the planets motion around the sun, but the rotation of the planets have nothing to do with gravity.
No one knows why the planets are revolving. gravity didn’t do it.
So we all feel the steady motion of the earth, but for this to be. there must be a exterior force holding the earth’s axis steady.

Click to expand...

You are talking about angular momentum and inertia. The prevailing theory is that the formation of the planets themselves generate angular momentum. Of course these theories are incomplete!

The rotational axis is not fixed. There is precession, nutation, polar motion. What is it do you mean by fixed?

There is a fundamental disconnection between angular motion and linear motion in Newtonian physics that presents a lot of these problems by making it conceptually awkward. It ends up becoming more descriptive. I think resolving that would go along way to figure out why things can spin and also move through space.

Thank you for mentioning Velikovsky. I have never heard of him. In the archive I found this letter to him from Einstein:

Dear Dr. Velikovsky:

The reason for the energetic rejection of the opinions presented by you lies not in the assumption that in the motion of the heavenly bodies only gravitation and inertia are the determining factors. The reason for the rejection lies rather in the fact that on the basis of this assumption it was possible to calculate the temporal changes of star locations in the planetary system with an unimaginably great precision.

Against such precise knowledge, speculations of the kind as were advanced by you do not come into consideration by an expert. Therefore your book must appear to an expert as an attempt to mislead the public. I must admit that I myself had at first this impression, too. Only afterwards it became clear to me that intentional misleading was entirely foreign to you.

With friendly greetings,

Yours,

Albert Einstein

Click to expand...

Now that's a double-edged compliment!

what I am describing are examples of the earth's rotation by newtons laws of motion.
you are confusing the precession movement with axis rotational movement. the movement of the axis through precession is thought to be cause by an external source causing this nutation to the earths axis.

you obviously have never done the little experiment I mentioned with the bike wheel. to see one side of the axis of the wheel just suspended in air while the entire wheel rotates around you remaining finger drives house the huge missing force that keeps the earths axis fixed sidereally.

if no force was not holding the axis of the earth steady, the earth would be tumbling around as it orbited the sun. this is straight form the laws of motion.

rahu

rahu said:

what I am describing are examples of the earth's rotation by newtons laws of motion.
you are confusing the precession movement with axis rotational movement. the movement of the axis through precession is thought to be cause by an external source causing this nutation to the earths axis.

you obviously have never done the little experiment I mentioned with the bike wheel. to see one side of the axis of the wheel just suspended in air while the entire wheel rotates around you remaining finger drives house the huge missing force that keeps the earths axis fixed sidereally.

if no force was not holding the axis of the earth steady, the earth would be tumbling around as it orbited the sun. this is straight form the laws of motion.

rahu

Click to expand...

Actually I've probably done a lot more rotation experiments besides a bike wheel in basic physics classes (also a good one is a spinning stool, i.e. why is it that you can sit on it and not be flung off unless accelerating). Your analogy gets a little difficult when you rely on gravity to balance a wheel on your finger.

You still have not explained what you mean by tumbling around compared to fixed. The rotational axis is not fixed. Do you mean why doesn't the Earth go completely sideways? Are you talking about obliquity (ha, pun)? Perhaps you mean the movement of the rotational axis is constant rather than fixed?

There is nothing in Newton's laws that say a rotating object tumbles unless a force is acting on it. In fact, the opposite. It doesn't tumble unless something is acting on it.

Netwon's 1st Law of Rotational Motion: "A body continues in a state of rest or uniform rotation about its axis unless acted upon by an external torque."

I read some on Velikovsky. Seems he was pretty thoroughly considered and discredited numerous times, basing all his theories on mythology and hunches rather than direct evidence and completely disregarding physical laws in his analysis. Many scientists (surprisingly) seriously considered his propositions, then found them to be false.

I don't disagree that there is some dogma in science. But this is chasing ghosts.

Flapjacks said:

You are talking about angular momentum and inertia. The prevailing theory is that the formation of the planets themselves generate angular momentum. Of course these theories are incomplete!

The rotational axis is not fixed. There is precession, nutation, polar motion. What is it do you mean by fixed?

There is a fundamental disconnection between angular motion and linear motion in Newtonian physics that presents a lot of these problems by making it conceptually awkward. It ends up becoming more descriptive. I think resolving that would go along way to figure out why things can spin and also move through space.

Thank you for mentioning Velikovsky. I have never heard of him. In the archive I found this letter to him from Einstein:



Now that's a double-edged compliment!

Click to expand...

like everything else you are posting, it is bits and pieces knowledge disingenuously presented and in fact incorrect.. we can all use a search engine to give shallow view/criticism. I suggest you use a search engine to find a book to read comphrensively on these subjects.a simple sesarch of th elaws of motion will explain the forces create by rotational; movement .

you might have looked at how Einstein had changed his mind, the last time velikovsky and Einstein met.
http://varchive.org/bdb/meeting.htm

"But he was embarrassed. Had he not told me when parting after our last meeting in March about the great importance for the acceptance of a theory that it be able to generate accurate predictions? This was on March 11th. Now, four weeks later, I brought him the message that the very probe that I offered as a crucial test between our stands came out in my favor. Now he inquired what my reasons had been. It was not easy to answer his question, because Einstein became very emphatic. He stood up. His face was glowing. He spoke loudly, in a way I had never heard him speak before. “Which experiment would you like to have performed now?” he asked, in obvious desire to mitigate his guilt, because the previous summer he had not given enough attention to my request, and he let my suggestion go without action on his part. "

so months before Einstein died, he had changed his mind and now accepted velikovsky's theory

flapjacks I am not going to respond to your "scientific" objections because they are of the same nature as your attempt to discredit velikovsky, in spite of the facts and accurate predictions he had given.

rahu

rahu said:

like everything else you are posting, it is bits and pieces knowledge disingenuously presented and in fact incorrect.. we can all use a search engine to give shallow view/criticism. I suggest you use a search engine to find a book to read comphrensively on these subjects.a simple sesarch of th elaws of motion will explain the forces create by rotational; movement .

you might have looked at how Einstein had changed his mind, the last time velikovsky and Einstein met.
http://varchive.org/bdb/meeting.htm

"But he was embarrassed. Had he not told me when parting after our last meeting in March about the great importance for the acceptance of a theory that it be able to generate accurate predictions? This was on March 11th. Now, four weeks later, I brought him the message that the very probe that I offered as a crucial test between our stands came out in my favor. Now he inquired what my reasons had been. It was not easy to answer his question, because Einstein became very emphatic. He stood up. His face was glowing. He spoke loudly, in a way I had never heard him speak before. “Which experiment would you like to have performed now?” he asked, in obvious desire to mitigate his guilt, because the previous summer he had not given enough attention to my request, and he let my suggestion go without action on his part. "

Click to expand...

This was written by Velikovsky. They are his opinions, so it's not certain what happened between them or how Einstein felt (embarrassed, guilty, whatever).

You do not mention his actual predictions that came true or give any references to them, but what I've found of his predictions have all been false. For one, hydrocarbons on Venus: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/5992075_Venus_clouds_test_for_hydrocarbons

That's just the tip of the iceberg.

It's pretty amazing that he got as much interest as he did not being trained in hard sciences. I don't really hold that against him, it's nice to hear that scientists looked at his work despite being more of a scholar than a scientist. It shows science is not totally enshrined. I would like to think it could still be that way if the ideas presented held up to scrutiny.

I didn't use a search engine to look up the laws of motion, except to copy and paste it for you. I've studied the subject enough to find your comments vague and inadequate scientifically, and your links don't help.

I did use a search engine to figure out what overall theory you're indirectly referencing - the Electric Universe Theory it seems - so I could actually read about it. Why didn't you just say that in the first place? It seems pretty well disproved, but I reserve judgement on that.

I'm also getting the impression that you don't understand what I'm referring to as far as the science goes, because repeating "rotational movement" over and over isn't describing anything. I am open to being proven wrong.

If you want to ignore the actual physical laws as they are written or not answer any basic inquiries into this theory that you espouse, that's up to you. I'll cede the floor to those who hold no skepticism towards these claims so you can have a satisfying discussion.

For other posters: Here are some websites on the Electric Universe Theory in case you don't know what it is and want to read about it.

http://www.electricuniverse.info/Electric_Universe_theory

rahu said:

Most of us have dealt with a flat bike tire. And while fixing it, surely we have all noticed that if one spins the wheel in your hands, the tire exerts a right angle force that allows one to support the tire on one finger. As long as the wheel spins it will remain horizontal and spin around the remaining finger. The rotation creates a force that holds the axles level. But if you want to stop the wheel from revolving around you finger, one must gasp both ends of the wheel axle and hold it steady.
Any rotating body that has mass creates these forces, by Newton’s laws of motion. the more massive the object, the greater the rotations force created. Every day we see the sun go across the sky and the seasons come and go with the steady, fixed orientation of the rotations axis of the earth. The problem is that for these constant movements of the earth to exist, there must be forces that hold the axis steady. If one places a rotating object in a vacuum, it will tumble thru space.
The spontaneous response is Gravity is doing it is keeping the axis fixed in place.. But that is not even close. Gravity is said to result in the planets motion around the sun, but the rotation of the planets have nothing to do with gravity.
No one knows why the planets are revolving. gravity didn’t do it.
So we all feel the steady motion of the earth, but for this to be. there must be a exterior force holding the earth’s axis steady.

Yet ,unbelievably, Science has no answer, in fact Science does not even ask the question. Because the answer must be hidden to conceal the secret of the black magician powers .

The only explanation ever given was an nebulous statement by Ernst mach. He said the every star in the universe is “holding” the axis’s ,of all the planets and stars in the universe, steady.
This is pure conjecture; it has no connection to any known forces. But Einstein coined the term the “mach affect”. But you will be hard pressed to find this in any scientific book .

So the question remains unanswered, what holds the rotational axis of the earth fixed.
Such a big omission in the standard model is hard to comprehend.
This is an example of the Mirrors of Science. One can not believe that science does not have a answer but they do not..
I didn’t figure this out , I read a paper http://teslasociety.com/biography.htm


in this article he calculated the immense rotational forces existing from the earth’s rotation. And then pointed out that scientist ignore this conundrum.
I had to read the article 2-3 times before I realized the simplicity of the scientific omission, he had pointed out.
So science is in fact concealing the most primal dynamics in our world.

Emmnuael velikovsky pointed out the missing celestial dynamic:the electrical fields of the planets and stars.
http://velikovsky.org/en/velikovsky.html
http://varchive.org/




the rotation energies of all the planets and stars is totally ignored by science. there is enough rotational energy existant to provide the missing dark energy. but scientist do not want to focus on a source of free energy, so they come jup with yet another hypothetic energy .


Emmanuel velikovsky pointed out the missing celestial dynamic: the electrical fields of the planets and stars. His theories have been validated with by space probes thru the years, yet the “itelligentsia” , dismisses his work.understanably as he overturns, newton ,Darwin, Einstein and shows the intellectual blind spots of archeology and history. Velikovsky single handedly disclosed the falscity and manipulation of the archeological/historical records.
the magnetic fields of the planets and sun are the forces that orders the universe, just as electrical fields order the world of atoms and sub atomic particle. The affect produced on light by a “gravitation” field and on light produced by an electromagnetic field cannot be distinguished. Both are defined by inverse square mathematical equations I have emphasized repeatedly the glaring omission of scientist to look at the causes for the stability of the earth axis. clearly the editors of history do not want this dynamic included in modern scientific theories as this would reveal the true source of the energies underlying our reality.
It may seem like a simple matter, but recent discoveries are beginning to show the true strength of the rotation of the earth.
The alternating current of our electrical system was called, by it’s inventor.nikolai tesla, a rotating magnetic field system. it is the rotation of the earth that gives the electrical force. Scientist had recently noted that relativistic particles are generated in the van Allen belts. At first scientist thought these near light speed particles had to have come from beyond the solar system. Then recently they noted that these particles were being accelerated in the van allen belt. The problem was where was the van allen belt getting the immense energy to raise these particles to near light speed.
Now they have found out that the magnetic field of the earth’ rotation is the force accelerating these relativistic particles. No scientist thought that the earth’s relatively slow rotation speed could cause these charged particles to form. Yet that is exactly what is happening. they have come up with new theories but still where the energy is coming from eludes them.
The affects Einstein gives to gravity are illusionary, a singularity is illusionary ,black holes are illusionary just as steph hawkens, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes-9085016.html
the dean of black holes has determined. Gravity is a mathematical mirror to hide the power of the electromagnetic fields of the earth and sun.
I have emphasized repeatedly the glaring omission of scientist to look at the causes for the stability of the earth axis. clearly the editors of history do not want this dynamic included in modern scientific theories as this would reveal the true source of the energies underlying our reality.
It may seem like a simple matter, but recent discoveries are beginning to show the true strength of the rotation of the earth.

rahu

Click to expand...

the earth’s rotation creates a gyroscopic affect. The earth should be tumbling in it’s orbit because of the gyroscopic affect.to keep the axis of rotation stable,such as aligned to the north start, the axis must be secured.
The earth’s axis is fixed, some force must be being exerted on the earth’s poles for this stability to exist. This is the missing force that science does not identify, in fact science does not even ask the question of what stabilizes the earth’s axis. Without the axis being stable we would have not season, we would have no set period of sun rise and sunset, life as we know it could not evolve in such a chaotic situation
The easiest way to comprehend this is to see these forces in action.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJWIl4MYMbw&list=PLmTxBRsvYE1pOSK5N4byEJnY4M6-8kaQz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbdrqpXb-fY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty9QSiVC2g0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4YlDH_yRjA

rahu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJWIl4MYMbw&list=PLmTxBRsvYE1pOSK5N4byEJnY 4M6-8kaQz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbdrqpXb-fY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty9QSiVC2g0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4YlDH_yRjA


A picture is worth a thousand words they say, here is really helps because it still seems so strange the way simple rotational motion can create these forces.
What is not mentioned in these videos is that in space, with nothing securing the wheel, the wheel would tumble around. the videos all show one axle supported. this shows the motion, but to stop the motion two hands would have to be used to stop the gyroscopic motions.
These forces are immense. The mass of the earth isis estimated to be 6 sextillion, 588 quintillion short tons (6.6 sextillion short tons) or 5.97 1024 kilograms, with the Earth's mean density being 5.515 times that of water (the standard).
at the equator the speed of the earth rotation is approximately 1000 mph
Earth's rotational velocity is approximately 1,674.4 km
what force is counteracting these powers. Whose hands are holding the axis toward the pole star?
Actually the only place I have read about this astronomical ommission was in a watch tower magazine years ago. The article claimed that this prove god existence because science had not explanation for the fixation of the axis(and still don’t).
My own prejudices were totally scientific when I first read the paper by Nikola Tesla
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla
I could not conceptualize how there could be such great force unaccounted for by science.
After 2-3 readings it finally sank in when I remembered the bicycle wheel motions as a child.
The base of all the other lies of omission and Damned Lies of science follow this seminal mental/intellectual blindspot . or more correctly this cultural program by the editors of history.

rahu

Come on planets rotate because of the contraction of the original nebulous material. A slight movement causes appreciable rotation as it contracts from hundreds of light years inward.

Velikovsky? A one man show?

unfortunately phil you don't know what you are talking about. the rotation of the planets is one of the problems with the accreation theory.
https://search.yahoo.com/search;_yl...&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&p=accretion theory
your are scientifically wrong. Gravity can not produce the rotation of the planets that fact is not even debated by the scientist, it is unexplained like many facts of reality that do not fit the standard model. for that matter , the accreadion theory works very well for the inmner rocky planets,except venus , and except for mercury's slight rotation, but there is no way to tweak the accreation theory to account for the gas giants. the only theories on these planets all postulate outside influences on these.
rahu

If I am wrong, apparently I am in good company...

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=416

Anyway, the bottom line is that stars like the Sun spin from the original angular momentum that was there in the solar nebula from which it formed. Not only that, all orbital motion of the planets (including the spin) is due to this orginal angular momentum.

Click to expand...

4.54 billion years ago, our Solar System formed within a cloud of hydrogen not unlike the Orion Nebula, or the Eagle Nebula, with its awesome pillars of creation. Then, it took some kick, like from the shockwave from a nearby supernova, and this set a region of the cold gas falling inward through its mutual gravity. As it collapsed, the cloud began to spin.
But why?
It’s the conservation of angular momentum.

Think about the individual atoms in the cloud of hydrogen. Each particle has its own momentum as it drifts through the void. As these atoms glom onto one another with gravity, they need to average out their momentum. It might be possible to average out perfectly to zero, but it’s really really unlikely.
Which means, there will be some left over. Like a figure skater pulling in her arms to spin more rapidly, the collapsing proto-Solar System with its averaged out particle momentum began to spin faster and faster.
This is the conservation of angular momentum at work.

Click to expand...

He thinks that there is a force holding the planets "steady" during rotation, not that rotation itself isn't explained (I think -- I hope).

For instance, the ice skater is holding herself upright while spinning, but if she was in space, how would her spinning behavior look? Would her axis of rotation remain upright as it does when she is standing on the Earth? I think that is what he wants to address. We can say gravity is responsible for holding her upright on Earth (well, her counteraction of gravity and normal force), but not in space. Would her axis of rotation change without those forces that hold her up?

I believe it has to do with the torque -- like it says in the videos, force is a vector (so it has a direction as well as magnitude) so if a torque is applied, there is an axis of rotation generated from that particular torque. To use linear motion as an analogy: if you apply a force to an object and it travels through space in a particular direction, without the influence of any other forces, would you expect that object to change direction spontaneously? That is basically what rahu is suggesting... that the direction (axis) of motion would change without a force (torque?) to "hold it" in place, which is ultimately nonsensical in terms of physical laws.

But it gets confusing. Like I said... it would be nice to see better integration between angular and linear motion. They are treated a separate behaviors to describe them, which is odd because motion is motion. Why are there two different "kinds" that have the same rules but respond differently to them? I think it's a failure of the model, really. But I'm not smart enough to come up with a resolution.

both of my antagonist have made my initial point. science ignores the kinetic energy caused by the earths rotation, and science ignores the rotation of the planets and sun when formulating the accreation theory. science does not want to explain how the earth axis is steadied. or the planets and stars. just to keep my critics mind on point, the orbital rotation of the planets are accounted for in the accreation theory. not the rotation around the axis.
you have both show gross error so until you read up on the subject, I don't see any need to respond. one can not debate the ignorant.

rahu

And I feel no need to debate further with someone who calls those with another opinion ignorant. Name calling is a sign of weakness.



P.S. If you have guts, go and present your ideas in this forum:

http://cosmoquest.org/forum/

in the Against The Mainstream subforum. Good Luck...

Phil said:

And I feel no need to debate further with someone who calls those with another opinion ignorant. Name calling is a sign of weakness.



P.S. If you have guts, go and present your ideas in this forum:

http://cosmoquest.org/forum/

in the Against The Mainstream subforum. Good Luck...

Click to expand...

Makes me sad because this could have been an interesting discussion. Maybe we should make a Tesla and fringe physics theories thread.

Although that might devolve into vicious debates about free energy.

EDIT: Oh wait, there is one, and rahu crashed it, and maybe where this one was inspired?: http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=41678&highlight=tesla

Resurrection time!

Ok, I'm getting a clearer picture now of what your frame of reference is for these arguments. Thank you rahu.

J. P. Morgan really f'ed up a lot of things, and it's nuts that there is still a bank around with his namesake and no one bats an eyelash. I mean, he wanted to help take over the US government.

I've read 3 books about Telsa... including his autobiography. It's hard to know why Wardenclyffe has never been followed up on. I've assumed it's mostly because nobody is smart enough to do it. But it's very possible that it's suppression of information. Or a bit of both.

I didn't realize you were relating the harnessing of electromagnetic energy from the Earth with this theory of the Electric Universe, because while Tesla is a credible scientist, Velikovsky is not (even if he inspired Einstein to revisit electromagnetism). So thank you for clarifying the relationship you were proposing between the two.

Tesla invented the A/C(rotating magnetic field current) he worked with the “famous” Edison who never got out of the low amperage direct current.tesla was a genius with astral/psychic visionary abilities.
Tesla wtote all the patents on the ac system. He would see the mechanism he wanted in his mind. After visualizing the entire piece of apparatus in his mind, he went to a engineer and told him all the exact measurements and lengths, all the technical data to create the apparatus. nothing was written down before hand. It always worked perfectly. So he was not merely genius he was inspired as can also been be seen by his concern to give all people free energy from the earth’s rotating magnetic field and vehement his stand against wars.
In tesla’s natal chart ,using the 12:00 as given by astrodienst, the moon is conjunct the node and mars and square the sun.
The Neptune/Uranus midpoint is conjunct the south node and this is what gives he mystical/technical intuitions and with Neptune forming a the 2/11th harmonic with Uranus and each 1/11th harmonic to the south node, symbolizes his uuse of these visions and dreams with abilities of an Adept.
He always said that he saw electricity differently from the scientific models.for over a hundred years science could not duplicate his techniques to form what is called “ball lightning”, electric charge in a stable ball like structures. Tesla had picture of him sitting in his lab with the huge tesla coils creating balls of electric at tesla’s feet.

Tesla realized the earth was a huge capacitor with standing field waves.tesla noticed this when he would track thunderstorms as they slide off the rockies and traveled across the great plains. He had thought he signals would become weaker but he found there was the standing wave, as the thunderstorm’s radio signature would become strong again when it pasted through a earth’s electrical wave.
Every 8 minutes the earth is recharged. No one knows how, but recently scientist observed that every 8 minutes cylindrical packets of solar”wind” enter the ionsphere and penetrate it or these energy packets will travel laterally to some other point and then penetrate to the earths surface apparently.
Tesla creations allowed modern civilization to evolve so rapidly. Without the amperage tesla’s method gives, the high level of current needed by industry,net, etc, could not exist.
He was the genius and toast of the western world at the turn of the 20th century.
Yet he is the only scientist to point out this , the forces created by the earth rotation are being ignored by standard science.
The scientist Ernst Mach, best known for the measurement of the speed of sound as mach 1,2,3.. was consider a philosopher of science as well as an experimenter and he made a supposition that all the mass of all the stars in the universe were keeping getting the earth’s axis and those of other planets, steady. Of course this is simply words because it did not describe any mechanism for his relationship. No he did not mean gravity. In fact Einstein considered mach with respect . Einstein coined a term, ‘The Mach Effect” to describe mach’s musings.
this is where “Science “ has left the Omission. Acknowledged but unexplained.
No ,the ignorance of science does not fit this. This is the total ignoring of the basic astronomical rhythm that insure light through season of change and years of constant environment rhythms. Such ignorance,( like the ignorance of these trolls,) is a calculated move. One mark of a troll is that they at first deny the very fact you are presenting. And respond with ignorance (aka lies) . this is part of the same editors of history’s mindset to keep the true value of nodal astrology surrounded in philosophy.
With such a huge omission in dynamics of the real world, is it any wonder “Science” does not know where 90% of the universes mass and energy is?


rahu

"Science" doesn't deny the magnetic field of the Earth (obviously) or the potential to tap it as an energy source, it seems:

http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/wtether.html

P.S. A troll is not a person that simply disagrees with you, or even asks you questions about what you think. I don't know about Phil, but initially I never disagreed with you but inquired further, and you took it upon yourself to be rude and dismissive. Perhaps someday you'll learn to treat other's respectfully, until then I'll ignore your disparaging and unjustified attacks because Jupiter in Pisces makes me all-too-forgiving. But, I'm done with this thread, thanks!