He was an Orthodox Christian and a Serb (his father was an orthodox priest). That does not change your point much, but lets get that right. It’s important for the people of his mother and father. They have been denied too much, and suffered terribly for being Orthodox. Tesla is their man.
Excellent as usual. I remember coming across a youtube video of the battle between AC and DC. I believe Tesla was working with George Westinghouse on AC versus DC. Anyhow, the DC folks wanted to show the dangers of AC. So they wired an electric plate and put an elephant on it and electrocuted it. Very bizarre.
Yes correct. Westinghouse financed Tesla for a while then bought Tesla's patents for a fraction of their cost. With DC - Ediston et al - used to wire up AC currents to animals (lots of stray cats and dogs in New York City), and fry them with AC. Rather savage. Tesla used to perform in a top hat, running AC currents through his body and having the sparks emit from his hands. Must have been a peculiar sight. He also demonstrated the first direct energy weapon in New York. Using just sound vibrations, he demolitioned a large building in a matter of minutes.
Tesla was the man, no question. Interestingly, when Einstein died no one came and stole his equations - how odd! As a curveball have you ever looked at Wal Thornhill's ( Electric Universe) theory of gravity?
Certainly! Studied Thornhill. Future posts on the same. Informative, precise, intelligent, factual. EU is mostly spot on. There are some differences.
1) 100% alignment on the curving, warped, Riemannian geometry of General Relativity is a fraud. Space is space. It does not bend. The universe is a flat disc.
2) 100% agree that the universe is governed by electrical and magnetic tension, not by the gravitational pull of dead, electrically neutral mass.
3) In the EU model, the Earth pulls the Moon - atomic dipoles are electrostatically aligned. Certainly more germane than the Standard Model of the Moon.
4) In the aether model, the Moon is a dielectric node sweeping through a pressurised magnetic Toroid, maintaining tension in the overarching fluid circuit. This is different than EU theory (which is not based on fluid dynamics).
The aether model relies on macroscopic fluid dynamics and pressure gradients; Thornhill relies on microscopic subatomic dipole chains. I imagine some bright sparks have merged the two models somehow.
Ah that's great, he always impressed me. AND he met Velikovsky. I'll look forward to that one. There's also Gareth Samuel with his See The Pattern on YouTube - he's worth listening to, reasonably open-minded and highly intelligent.
Yes, carpenters have more of a grasp of science than the tensor maths man. I use tensor calculus in building some AI models. Without an absolute reference point (eg. a valid data number), they don't mean anything (can produce all sorts of 'correct' outputs, but without a context).
Does gravitational lensing exist? Space cannot be warped. The JWST is pretty clear - the universe is a flat disc. Warping space was done to save Einstein's equations.
GL is more word salads from the cult. Disproven some 40 years ago. They based it on quasars. Bangers: higher quasar redshifts = gravitational lensing. No.
Arp, Hoyle and others proved that quasars are aligned along the minor, not major, axis of the host galaxy. ('The Quasar Controversy Resolved' Arp).
Higher quasar redshifts is because they are newly formed with one galaxy producing another. Discussed in some posts here as well (Arp, Seeing Red, p. 103).
Quasar formation is observed with ‘twins’ being formed on the opposite sides of the parent galaxy. If White Holes exist and if they eject quasars, most of cosmological theory will need a thorough rewrite.
Quite ridiculous to be honest. This is called a tautology.
-My theory says pace Newton et al that gravity can bend light or cause aberration (so your theory offers nothing new)
-My theory says that space and time are merged and curved (no proof offered)
-My theory says that this unproven curvature bends light around planets...
-So when some astro-evidence is found, that light bends around planets, which has existed since 1725, it proves my theory....
Good Christ.
Gravity has nothing to do with Einstein's theory. His gravity theorem assumes a 4th dimension. Star, stellar aberration have to do with the aether and gravity bending light. The aether exists. Relativity does not.
He was an Orthodox Christian and a Serb (his father was an orthodox priest). That does not change your point much, but lets get that right. It’s important for the people of his mother and father. They have been denied too much, and suffered terribly for being Orthodox. Tesla is their man.
Excellent as usual. I remember coming across a youtube video of the battle between AC and DC. I believe Tesla was working with George Westinghouse on AC versus DC. Anyhow, the DC folks wanted to show the dangers of AC. So they wired an electric plate and put an elephant on it and electrocuted it. Very bizarre.
Yes correct. Westinghouse financed Tesla for a while then bought Tesla's patents for a fraction of their cost. With DC - Ediston et al - used to wire up AC currents to animals (lots of stray cats and dogs in New York City), and fry them with AC. Rather savage. Tesla used to perform in a top hat, running AC currents through his body and having the sparks emit from his hands. Must have been a peculiar sight. He also demonstrated the first direct energy weapon in New York. Using just sound vibrations, he demolitioned a large building in a matter of minutes.
Tesla was the man, no question. Interestingly, when Einstein died no one came and stole his equations - how odd! As a curveball have you ever looked at Wal Thornhill's ( Electric Universe) theory of gravity?
Certainly! Studied Thornhill. Future posts on the same. Informative, precise, intelligent, factual. EU is mostly spot on. There are some differences.
1) 100% alignment on the curving, warped, Riemannian geometry of General Relativity is a fraud. Space is space. It does not bend. The universe is a flat disc.
2) 100% agree that the universe is governed by electrical and magnetic tension, not by the gravitational pull of dead, electrically neutral mass.
3) In the EU model, the Earth pulls the Moon - atomic dipoles are electrostatically aligned. Certainly more germane than the Standard Model of the Moon.
4) In the aether model, the Moon is a dielectric node sweeping through a pressurised magnetic Toroid, maintaining tension in the overarching fluid circuit. This is different than EU theory (which is not based on fluid dynamics).
The aether model relies on macroscopic fluid dynamics and pressure gradients; Thornhill relies on microscopic subatomic dipole chains. I imagine some bright sparks have merged the two models somehow.
Ah that's great, he always impressed me. AND he met Velikovsky. I'll look forward to that one. There's also Gareth Samuel with his See The Pattern on YouTube - he's worth listening to, reasonably open-minded and highly intelligent.
Great!
There is a joke to be discovered here, something about Einstotle building or fixing a car and how it goes afterwards. The brilliant engineer! 😂
Yes, carpenters have more of a grasp of science than the tensor maths man. I use tensor calculus in building some AI models. Without an absolute reference point (eg. a valid data number), they don't mean anything (can produce all sorts of 'correct' outputs, but without a context).
Yes, it’s amazing that science nurtures this branch which is so abstract and unpractical, with no way to prove those things hands on
Isn't gravitational lensing an example of the warping of space ?
Does gravitational lensing exist? Space cannot be warped. The JWST is pretty clear - the universe is a flat disc. Warping space was done to save Einstein's equations.
GL is more word salads from the cult. Disproven some 40 years ago. They based it on quasars. Bangers: higher quasar redshifts = gravitational lensing. No.
Arp, Hoyle and others proved that quasars are aligned along the minor, not major, axis of the host galaxy. ('The Quasar Controversy Resolved' Arp).
Higher quasar redshifts is because they are newly formed with one galaxy producing another. Discussed in some posts here as well (Arp, Seeing Red, p. 103).
https://unstabbinated.substack.com/p/quasars-black-holes-rabbit-holes?utm_source=publication-search
Quasar formation is observed with ‘twins’ being formed on the opposite sides of the parent galaxy. If White Holes exist and if they eject quasars, most of cosmological theory will need a thorough rewrite.
GL is not real of course.
https://scitechdaily.com/einstein-was-right-euclid-just-captured-space-time-warping-in-a-perfect-cosmic-ring/
Quite ridiculous to be honest. This is called a tautology.
-My theory says pace Newton et al that gravity can bend light or cause aberration (so your theory offers nothing new)
-My theory says that space and time are merged and curved (no proof offered)
-My theory says that this unproven curvature bends light around planets...
-So when some astro-evidence is found, that light bends around planets, which has existed since 1725, it proves my theory....
Good Christ.
Gravity has nothing to do with Einstein's theory. His gravity theorem assumes a 4th dimension. Star, stellar aberration have to do with the aether and gravity bending light. The aether exists. Relativity does not.