You are quite passionate in your position... and obviously you don't like Mr. Tesla very much either. I hear you ole buddy.
If you will allow a slight rebuttal...
Your position is well grounded. Your experience in the matter has tenure. Nothing wrong with what you say. You must consider that your path, road and journey is not ubiquitous and you could never been be aware of all that occurs on and off this planet. Not a slap in the face, we all share this position.
In my journey, I have arrived at the conclusion that there is infinite knowledge beyond our collective human scope. As we mature as a species (like stop killing each other, greed, and other bad human demeanor) we will likely remain ignorant of this knowledge... for the same reason you would withhold certain knowledge from a child.
I mean, we can't even answer some basic questions like "Why are we even here? What is the purpose? Why is 80% of our awareness hidden in a subconscious? Why does no religion acknowledge or speak of anything off-planet? Many questions. The question we are discussing here (preferably not arguing about) is about energy... right? And as of right now, I agree, nuclear energy is the best we have. But if you will, assume for a moment you are God, the designer, the one God who enable all this. You created the universe and all that is in it. Now that is a huge hunk of power, energy, manifestation! (I'm not religions btw). You are all knowing, all-seeing. So you decide to design a planet where we struggle just to keep the lights on? Irrational isn't it? So, yea, I strongly believe there is and will be universal energy available on this planet at some point. Tomorrow? 1000 years from now? Who knows. You and I surely don't.
So within my path of asking profound questions and seeking those answers (without bias) I have concluded there is a tremendous amount of greatness in both tech and human behavior ahead of us. I further believe the two or connected. When human beings stop weaponizing the technology to kill each other then, and only then, would we be allowed access to technology so powerful.
So, please, let us stop arguing over who is right. I have no claim nor addiction to being right. My quest is only in pursuit of answers to some very large and profound, universal questions. Being retired, I have the luxury of time to invest in this quest. We aren't that different at the end of the day.
Nonsense. I was into Tesla before any of the recent fascination. I was particularly interested in his viscous turbine as a suitable innovation in rocket propulsion.
The limitations of Tesla's knowledge have nothing to do with deep philosophy. Life without struggle is not life, and today we (in the West) struggle very little for copious amounts of ready power. We already have "universal" energy, if we are willing to embrace it. It will give us millennia in which to find even more "universal" energy. It is not necessary to wait in hope.
If you study the development of technology, you will find that many of its key innovations have been the products and byproducts of weapons development and manufacture. There are valid reasons for this, and our option is to accept it or not.
And I have my own ideas about what may come next: cold fusion (explained), boron-10 fission, and fission plasma rocket engines. Being retired, I now find that I have a very narrowed window of time to do anything about this, but good luck to you.
Given your background, I would welcome your opinion on the example I provided regarding the experiment showing a computer communicating with a human outside the 5 senses and what you think was the connection. Also, in the entanglement paradox... proximity in the entanglement didn't matter, what was the comm channel between them.
I had to back up and find your example. It was in a different conversation. The results were interesting. It seems fairly obvious to me that the interaction is on the level of a quantum entanglement, in the sense that the computer's "choice" elicited the heart reaction, not the presentation of the image. This connects with a rather large and interesting literature on paranormal phenomena. There are several books by Rupert Sheldrake that review these matters. They are characterized by seeming violations of physics. Kirilian photography seems able to record a silhouette of missing tissue. In the "sense of being stared at", observers in a high office building overlooking a public square, with windows prepared with reflective glaze, could intently stare at persons walking across the square. Invariably, the person would stop, in a troubled demeanor, and then look around and up, DIRECTLY AT THE PERSON VIEWING HIM. Then there are ESP sensors of random card draws (not shown to them), who call correctly the NEXT card drawn. I mean, all this stuff happens, but there is no conventional explanation. So, I am amenable to thinking that these parapsychic abilities are related to quantum entanglement, for lack of a better hypothesis. Your account tends to strengthen that idea. There is also the possibility that, in the pathway through sensation, perception, and cognition, there is an early process that involves the heart before it involves the cerebral cortex. The interesting thing to keep in mind is that muscle cells have a great similarity to nerve cells (so I have read).
As for quantum entanglement, I need to study that more. The characteristics of the known experiments are generally explained as not implying information communication. I find that a little dubious, but I don't have a good rebuttal as yet. The general idea is that the entanglement means the entangled states are not separate states at all, but manifestations of a single state. But, as you say, it does not seem to matter if the portions of the single state are in proximity or not. It smells like instantaneous communication. It can't be photons. So, what is it? The late Tom Van Flandern, an astronomer-physicist at the U.S. Naval Observatory, once did a calculation of the effects on Earth's orbit if gravity was transmitted at various speeds. The nature of the effect would be a light aberration of the direction from which gravity was working from the Sun to the Earth, causing the Earth to have a spiraling orbit. His calculations put a very high bound on the speed of gravity propagation. I can't recall the value, but I think it was well beyond millions of times the speed of light. This gets into the notion of space being incompressible, but that is a concept that begs proper description. (Van Flandern has at least one book available: "Dark Matter, Missing Planets, and New Comets.")
But I have lately pondered an interesting conclusion in the sphere of conventional relativity. In conventional relativity, for an object in translatory motion, the perceived time of passage becomes slower as the speed increases. This has been experimentally verified by measuring the lifetimes of mesons at different relativistic speeds. The faster the speed, the longer the lifetime. Not only does time extend, perceived distance contracts. This all leads to interesting science fiction plotlines, but I was wondering what happens if you take it to a logical extreme: the photon, which travels AT the speed of light, from point A to point B. The implications are that the photon would not experience any delay between being at point A and point B...and it would not know any distance between them, either. Now, this is a big deal. Somewhere, billions of light-years away, a photon is emitted, travels the distance, and is seen by someone looking up at the night sky...and as far as the photon is concerned, it didn't go anywhere and there was no time involved. This begins to sound like "spooky action at a distance." And that is where I am, with no answers yet.
Some esoteric sources, many in fact, have stated Tesla was on to something when he mentioned harnessing the power of 3,6,9... but he was not successful because he left out 12. Further clarification of this, it was stated that our current science is handicapped because we are still using base 10 math while the rest of the universe uses base 12. Had he being using base 12 math he would have included the 12 as well and the discoveries he sought would have been revealed.
Another revelation was that our physics is based on linear calculations but outside of 3D the physics is based on a circle.
Some folks discredit such sources, however, when no materials exist on planet to provide explanations (rabbit holes or not), you have to look outside the box sometimes.
You are quite passionate in your position... and obviously you don't like Mr. Tesla very much either. I hear you ole buddy.
If you will allow a slight rebuttal...
Your position is well grounded. Your experience in the matter has tenure. Nothing wrong with what you say. You must consider that your path, road and journey is not ubiquitous and you could never been be aware of all that occurs on and off this planet. Not a slap in the face, we all share this position.
In my journey, I have arrived at the conclusion that there is infinite knowledge beyond our collective human scope. As we mature as a species (like stop killing each other, greed, and other bad human demeanor) we will likely remain ignorant of this knowledge... for the same reason you would withhold certain knowledge from a child.
I mean, we can't even answer some basic questions like "Why are we even here? What is the purpose? Why is 80% of our awareness hidden in a subconscious? Why does no religion acknowledge or speak of anything off-planet? Many questions. The question we are discussing here (preferably not arguing about) is about energy... right? And as of right now, I agree, nuclear energy is the best we have. But if you will, assume for a moment you are God, the designer, the one God who enable all this. You created the universe and all that is in it. Now that is a huge hunk of power, energy, manifestation! (I'm not religions btw). You are all knowing, all-seeing. So you decide to design a planet where we struggle just to keep the lights on? Irrational isn't it? So, yea, I strongly believe there is and will be universal energy available on this planet at some point. Tomorrow? 1000 years from now? Who knows. You and I surely don't.
So within my path of asking profound questions and seeking those answers (without bias) I have concluded there is a tremendous amount of greatness in both tech and human behavior ahead of us. I further believe the two or connected. When human beings stop weaponizing the technology to kill each other then, and only then, would we be allowed access to technology so powerful.
So, please, let us stop arguing over who is right. I have no claim nor addiction to being right. My quest is only in pursuit of answers to some very large and profound, universal questions. Being retired, I have the luxury of time to invest in this quest. We aren't that different at the end of the day.
Nonsense. I was into Tesla before any of the recent fascination. I was particularly interested in his viscous turbine as a suitable innovation in rocket propulsion.
The limitations of Tesla's knowledge have nothing to do with deep philosophy. Life without struggle is not life, and today we (in the West) struggle very little for copious amounts of ready power. We already have "universal" energy, if we are willing to embrace it. It will give us millennia in which to find even more "universal" energy. It is not necessary to wait in hope.
If you study the development of technology, you will find that many of its key innovations have been the products and byproducts of weapons development and manufacture. There are valid reasons for this, and our option is to accept it or not.
And I have my own ideas about what may come next: cold fusion (explained), boron-10 fission, and fission plasma rocket engines. Being retired, I now find that I have a very narrowed window of time to do anything about this, but good luck to you.
Given your background, I would welcome your opinion on the example I provided regarding the experiment showing a computer communicating with a human outside the 5 senses and what you think was the connection. Also, in the entanglement paradox... proximity in the entanglement didn't matter, what was the comm channel between them.
Look forward to you ideas.
I had to back up and find your example. It was in a different conversation. The results were interesting. It seems fairly obvious to me that the interaction is on the level of a quantum entanglement, in the sense that the computer's "choice" elicited the heart reaction, not the presentation of the image. This connects with a rather large and interesting literature on paranormal phenomena. There are several books by Rupert Sheldrake that review these matters. They are characterized by seeming violations of physics. Kirilian photography seems able to record a silhouette of missing tissue. In the "sense of being stared at", observers in a high office building overlooking a public square, with windows prepared with reflective glaze, could intently stare at persons walking across the square. Invariably, the person would stop, in a troubled demeanor, and then look around and up, DIRECTLY AT THE PERSON VIEWING HIM. Then there are ESP sensors of random card draws (not shown to them), who call correctly the NEXT card drawn. I mean, all this stuff happens, but there is no conventional explanation. So, I am amenable to thinking that these parapsychic abilities are related to quantum entanglement, for lack of a better hypothesis. Your account tends to strengthen that idea. There is also the possibility that, in the pathway through sensation, perception, and cognition, there is an early process that involves the heart before it involves the cerebral cortex. The interesting thing to keep in mind is that muscle cells have a great similarity to nerve cells (so I have read).
As for quantum entanglement, I need to study that more. The characteristics of the known experiments are generally explained as not implying information communication. I find that a little dubious, but I don't have a good rebuttal as yet. The general idea is that the entanglement means the entangled states are not separate states at all, but manifestations of a single state. But, as you say, it does not seem to matter if the portions of the single state are in proximity or not. It smells like instantaneous communication. It can't be photons. So, what is it? The late Tom Van Flandern, an astronomer-physicist at the U.S. Naval Observatory, once did a calculation of the effects on Earth's orbit if gravity was transmitted at various speeds. The nature of the effect would be a light aberration of the direction from which gravity was working from the Sun to the Earth, causing the Earth to have a spiraling orbit. His calculations put a very high bound on the speed of gravity propagation. I can't recall the value, but I think it was well beyond millions of times the speed of light. This gets into the notion of space being incompressible, but that is a concept that begs proper description. (Van Flandern has at least one book available: "Dark Matter, Missing Planets, and New Comets.")
But I have lately pondered an interesting conclusion in the sphere of conventional relativity. In conventional relativity, for an object in translatory motion, the perceived time of passage becomes slower as the speed increases. This has been experimentally verified by measuring the lifetimes of mesons at different relativistic speeds. The faster the speed, the longer the lifetime. Not only does time extend, perceived distance contracts. This all leads to interesting science fiction plotlines, but I was wondering what happens if you take it to a logical extreme: the photon, which travels AT the speed of light, from point A to point B. The implications are that the photon would not experience any delay between being at point A and point B...and it would not know any distance between them, either. Now, this is a big deal. Somewhere, billions of light-years away, a photon is emitted, travels the distance, and is seen by someone looking up at the night sky...and as far as the photon is concerned, it didn't go anywhere and there was no time involved. This begins to sound like "spooky action at a distance." And that is where I am, with no answers yet.
Some esoteric sources, many in fact, have stated Tesla was on to something when he mentioned harnessing the power of 3,6,9... but he was not successful because he left out 12. Further clarification of this, it was stated that our current science is handicapped because we are still using base 10 math while the rest of the universe uses base 12. Had he being using base 12 math he would have included the 12 as well and the discoveries he sought would have been revealed.
Another revelation was that our physics is based on linear calculations but outside of 3D the physics is based on a circle.
Some folks discredit such sources, however, when no materials exist on planet to provide explanations (rabbit holes or not), you have to look outside the box sometimes.