Antigravity Research

Hi Stoat, I enjoyed reading your last post it was well thought out. [off subject>>] Finally, we get this huge north swell that was massive and I was out there for 5 hours today and can hardly move my arms now. That's what happens when its flat for so long then bam, there are waves and you are not in condition. Back to post, your electron is a negative charge compared to the proton, and electron travels around proton. In forward time motion the negative charge moves towards positive charge, I have a slightly different view of Gravitons---it is a higher speed higher frequency Electron and carries a Negative Charge. My reasoning is that there has to be a prime cause for all motion, and from my studies of antigravitational effects, e.g., Biefield Brown=a discharging capacitor always moves towards positive pole. Your post covered alot of territory I will try to address several of your points that really hit home to me.

The graviton moves at speed of gravity, and electrons form during the collision process with atoms and operate in the light speed bandwidth of frequencies. The graviton ping and sine wave frequency demodulation into light speed translations is taking place some where in nucleons. Here is where your "strong brute" concept comes to play="a particle of matter is created from the superposition of all frequencies." Now you are talking! Maybe a lot of these interactions are just not seen because they are happening above light frequencies.

I agree that we would be living in a positive space in general like proton. Our shell of resonance, sea of Elysium would resonate as a positive force. The prime mover is the Graviton that literally pours into all atomic structure at extreme speeds and it operates above this bandwidth of frequencies. The faster the motion, the faster the spin, the higher the generated frequencies. Gravitons originate from a higher scale of motion, where light would be generated and if we were a Being living there under those conditions in that bandwidth of frequencies we would see that FTL light but could not most likely see this lower scale of motion and light.

I think that magnetic fields are cycling gravitons that create a gravitostatic charged field. That magnets simply concentrate this extreme faster then light motion as a pushing force of gravity/gravitons. So, that virtual electrons can be literally created from this force simply because they are slowed down versions of the graviton.

I agree balance in infinite set, and all atomic subscales would originate from an inverse mirror of greater motion. This is a hunch, but I cannot see logically any other options since original cause must go along with all creation and is there represented in its smallest domains. How these extreme motion particles might operate we most likely will never be able to tell, because they most likely also operate above our bandwidth of frequencies. Does this mean that everything does emit extreme radiation above light? Probably Yes. John

In the mars thread folder, I tried to introduce a game. It got deleted. A group of whiz kids set up a web site, in which they claimed, rather archly, that they had built an unmanned ftl ship that carried a worm hole, for instant transportation of bulky stuff. They had tried it out and, on the first go, had found a pre technological planet at about 50 light years distance. It was socially rather like the culture of the 500 b.c.e. Mediterranean.

What they were after was advice on what to do about it. There were board areas for science, geology, philosophy, politics, spook craft, religion and so forth.

I did get people to play the game, it was fun to put oneself in the position of being the aliens. There was surprising unanimity on several points. The first being that these idiot whiz kids had to be brought under the aegis of some international body, before a real shooting war started. The second was that it had to be classified as very top secret. The third was, that if we could do it, then so could others. When we covertly studied this planet, we might well be being studied ourselves. By beings with bigger guns and uncertain philosophy.

The thing was, that everyone wanted to jump out of game character, to discuss some new insight. Aliens with mile long star ships is frightening but aliens with share portfolios is more so. One thing that we felt any covert study would want to have would be books. So, play the stock market and buy yourself google and amazon. Be very careful to not tip your hand by having a portfolio that might show up on the Pentagon's stock market terror analysis computer. Do ufo's crash we wondered? There are more plane crashes now than in 1906, so planes now are more unsafe. Not! Why not give the monkeys something to play with as a psychological test?

A bit off topic I know, I blame it on the white sands reference.[8D][][]

Back to the subject. When the big bang people look out thirteen billion years, they see galaxies, another billion years and there's just the heat of the big bang. Very odd that! Now, if we have at least 125 billion galaxies packed into a sub atomic particle with the speed of gravity increasing directly with the radius, we get something that looks rather like the big bang. But we have a phase transition at the speed of light, so the speed of light, speed of gravity ratio is hugely different.

Hm, the gravitational "temperature" is not uniform through the particle but the sub light "temperature is, or very near so. An exponential curve scaled down hugely on the y axis. I think the next step is to take a look at the infamous red shift.

On the particle being a superposition of an infinity of frequencies. The Banach Tarski paradox springs to mind. Now, I had been thinking about this in regard to the space of the vacuum but I think we have to consider it with regard to galaxies as minute variations in the space of a particle www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/5/23/134430/275

The paradox, so called, isn't a paradox at all. We get a one size fits all sphere. Be warned though, it does do one's head in a little bit.

In one of my recent posts I suggested that the universe is clever. here I think we have to differentiate between subjective consciousness and objective consciousness. [][}][}]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Stoat</i>
<br />Back to the subject. When the big bang people look out thirteen billion years, they see galaxies, another billion years and there's just the heat of the big bang. Very odd that! Now, if we have at least 125 billion galaxies packed into a sub atomic particle with the speed of gravity increasing directly with the radius, we get something that looks rather like the big bang. But we have a phase transition at the speed of light, so the speed of light, speed of gravity ratio is hugely different.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

[/lurk]

There is something about the big bang that has me puzzled. If the universe is 13 billion years old, as evidenced by objects that are 13 billion light years away, then how long did it take for those objects to get 13 billion light years away? If the universe expanded at, say 0.01c, then the universe could be over a trillion years old. Has anyone paid any attention to this?

James

[lurk]

Hi James, sorry about that. It's rather sloppy to say that the universe is 13.5 billion years old, it should be 13.5 billion light years old. The distance light travels in a year. Say that you are strolling down the street and a nuke goes off near you. Bummer! Though having a scientific turn of mind you might think about what is hitting you. First it's going to be gamma rays, then blue light, red light, microwaves and radio waves. Then a lot of dust and the odd car or two.

That's not what the big bang is supposed to do. It's an expansion of spacetime. The galaxies can be thought of as being dots drawn on the surface of a balloon, the balloon, as spacetime, expands but the dots don't get bigger. To do that we would have to stick little disks of something on top of our dots, to stop the rubber from stretching.

One of the problems with the big bang is that to get it to work, we have to introduce a whole host of corrections to make observation fit. One of these is that the initial bang had to expand spacetime at a vastly greater speed than that of light. Let's say that it's twenty billion times c, at the start, and it falls to the speed of light in one tenth of a second. Something has jammed on the brakes and it's this which allows matter to condense out.

One question has to be, how many galaxies are there? At the moment its about 125 billion but there are suggestions that it could be as many as 500 billion. The further we look out through time, to supposedly the youngest galaxies, and we see more and more of them, and they don't look that different from our own, we have to shorten the time it takes to slam on the brakes.

If we now consider that we are inside a sub atomic particle from higher scale of existence, then we get something that looks a lot like the big bang. Scaling its charge, the charge would take a trillion years to complete one cycle. Its wake creates sub quantum eddies of energy density. These would condense into galaxies. They would live out their lives and die. The "universe" would become a rather cold and bleak place over a trillion years but then the charge and its magnetic field would sweep through the region again. Destroying what was left in front of it and planting up new galaxies behind it.

If we built a new super duper hubble telescope and we looked out and saw galaxies 20 billion light years away. Then all we would be saying is that the charge passed through our region of space 20 billion light years ago.

(Edited) A sudden thought on this, this sub atomic "universe" has uniform sub light energy density throughout (maybe a slight increase at the edge) We simply cannot tell that it is rotating. However the gravitational energy density increases towards the edge. We are going from about 20 billion times c to 10^30 times c. There can be a gravitational shear. When the bec whirlpools create the condition for a galaxy, that whirlpool can be moving with respect to the medium.

Think of our rotating pan of liquid helium, and add a slight movement sideways as well. the whirlpool will have a little bulge to its edge on one side and a little trough on the other. Something like the brim of a fedora hat.

That was the best description of the Big Bang process that I have heard so far! I will address more later when I have more time. The charge on the wheel is continuous INTERACTION not a sweeping process in creation and destruction. MASS REGENERATION is balanced between forward and reverse motion, time is relative not fixed. We only see part of this process:

"If we grab onto the potter’s wheel of the Almighty, we will find ourselves spun out of control and into the discard bin of this Universe." Dan Burisch briefing material-Project Lotus

www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Burisch_33.doc

From creation of life to mass regeneration, this is a circuit that is completed from a much greater power source. We cannot look at atomic structure and think in terms of an isolated system---it is not! It is only a small part of a much larger scale time frame that we observe, whereas there are FTL processes that are happening in front of and behind this our visible frame! So, literally time is an illusion and we are stuck in this frame of reference and cannot see these large scale circuits and how they are looped. If we could take a sliding measurement of wavelengths by using a spectrometer to look at extreme to low frequencies our view of the surrounding energies in motion would be far different then what we now can see. Gravitons circuits flying into this region, Antigravitons twisting in opposite direction away from this mass fluctuations back to other side---completing circuit.

Stoat, you have some great ideas I want to look at further! John