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.
Give me a break. The universe does not give two cents for what base we use in our mathematics. It does what it wants to do, and all the measured natural constants are essentially prime numbers. If Tesla did not write it all down, his fancies come under the heading of "woo-woo."
You also have an uninformed view of how physics is formulated. (What you said about linear vs. circular is unintelligible. How do you explain our calculation of orbits, then?)
The sources are discredited because they are empty. "Looking outside the box" happens all the time. That way, we get quantum physics and relativity theory. You really ought to learn physics and stop reading popularizations from people who don't know physics.
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.
Give me a break. The universe does not give two cents for what base we use in our mathematics. It does what it wants to do, and all the measured natural constants are essentially prime numbers. If Tesla did not write it all down, his fancies come under the heading of "woo-woo."
You also have an uninformed view of how physics is formulated. (What you said about linear vs. circular is unintelligible. How do you explain our calculation of orbits, then?)
The sources are discredited because they are empty. "Looking outside the box" happens all the time. That way, we get quantum physics and relativity theory. You really ought to learn physics and stop reading popularizations from people who don't know physics.