1. Registering for the Forum

    We require a human profile pic upon registration on this forum.

    After registration is submitted, you will receive a confirmation email, which should contain a link to confirm your intent to register for the forum. At this point, you will not yet be registered on the forum.

    Our Support staff will manually approve your account within 24 hours, and you will get a notification. This is to prevent the many spam account signups which we receive on a daily basis.

    If you have any problems completing this registration, please email support@jackkruse.com and we will assist you.

Why do I think gravity is emergent? Here is a clue.

Discussion in 'The EMF Rx' started by Jack Kruse, Oct 26, 2014.

  1. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

  2. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    Hmm, looks like some of my speculations were in the ballpark -- http://forum.jackkruse.com/index.php?threads/ca-channel-blockers.8408/page-9#post-144389

    I still don't know if my speculations earlier today are related -- http://forum.jackkruse.com/index.ph...cium-channel-blocker.11956/page-3#post-145154

    The video states that Plasmoids are the cause of so called "bright neutron stars" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasmoid . Another case of macro meeting the micro. A part of me suspects that the body has natural Z-pinch mechanism to align and direct intra- and extra-ceullar ionic plasma currents (birkeland currents) to where they need to go.

    ---

    Sidenote: now subscribed to the Thunderbolts project (source of the video Jack linked)
     
  3. Josh

    Josh Gold

    Looks as though gravity took hold because it could be observed and measured in the 1700's and now we can observe and measure other things "below the surface" so to speak....Amazing how long science gets stuck on a model and or level.....
     
    Josh (Paleo Osteo) likes this.
  4. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    Electric Gravity


    Paraphrased excerpts/notes (the video is a critique of an article about worm holes between 2 black holes):

    All the electric dipoles in protons and neutrons line up to produce Gravity

    The direct electric force between particles occurs INSTANTLY .... "entanglement" is just an electric resonance between 2 subatomic particles, each compromised of an identical system of orbiting charged subparticles (an atom within an atom) regardless of their relative movement or distance apart.

    This model, which separates the EM waves in the medium from the direct longitudinal connection between all matter in the universe (electrical connection) opens up new insights for physicists (TYW: understatement of the last 2 centuries o_O)

    Black holes are a mathematical mistake equivalent to trying to divide by zero. Using gravity, which is a billion billion billion times weaker than the EM force (close to zero), to explain the concentrated forces in the middle of galaxies, and calling them black holes, is bound to give you answers that make no physical sense.

    The wormholes are a geometric construct in more than 3 dimensions, so they have nothing to do with the real space that physicists and engineers have to deal with.

    The laws of gravity are not fundamental, but arise from quantum entanglement.

    Modern physics is in the business of inventing new particles and concepts in the hopes of winning a nobel prize.

    Mathematics use dimensions to represent degrees of freedom. Time has no direction (it is not a dimensino). Joining space and time has no significance. So you cannot produce physical wormholes in space.
    I REALLY need to start going through all their videos :eek:
     
    NeilBB and Josh like this.
  5. nonchalant

    nonchalant Silver

    Nice summary, Yew. Thanks.
     
  6. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    [​IMG]
     
    Josh likes this.
  7. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    Maybe now you can see why I said what I said about gravity. It is a manifestation of another force.
     
  8. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    That emerges when you get wise.
     
    Josh likes this.
  9. Lahelada

    Lahelada New Member

    Autoimmune diseases have a communality. Their onset is preceded by more frequent tripping or falling. Failing magnetic sense resulting in failure to sense space and or time?
     
  10. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    Must-watch video of Wallace Thornhil explaining the basic principles of the Electric Universe. (40 mins). This has huge tie-ins to Tensegrity #6 and the rest of the blog in general. Too much breadth covered for a summary to be worth it. Just watch the damn thing. o_O

     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2014
  11. time itself is but a human construct
     
  12. in ten years we will be laughing again

    my next blog is about paradigm shifts
     
  13. NeilBB

    NeilBB New Member

    Nice video. Thornhill is an interesting guy and has significant disagreements with Einstein, BTW. As did Tesla, whose quote:
    Jack has been paraphrasing a lot lately. When this discussion is all said and done, I'm not sure that even Einstein's theories will be any more safe from scrutiny and revision than everyone else...
     
    yewwei.tan and Josh like this.
  14. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    You cant unify gravity when it emerges from the electromagnetic force..................that is where Einstein's brilliance ended. E=mc2 however remains intact in my view.
     
  15. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    Ha, I still need to process some of that stuff. o_O

    I was biased right from the start of the talk, when he invoked complexity theory to say that complex phenomena occurs as a result of simple rules. So much of the software I see is like that, eg: the TCP protocol that we're using to post to this forum has some remarkably simple algorithms controlling it's parameters. I was reading about the rollout of CoDel last year (used to manage bufferbloat), and I could understand it pretty easily.

    When I could never do is discover an algorithm like that; Simple things are very hard to discover.

    • Firstly, because we seem to have a bias against simple things -- there's an arrogance that something that can be explained to a high school student must be "too unsophisticated to describe reality".

      Of course, this is my mind is a failure to understand that it is almost impossible to control complex phenomena (as nature does) if the underlying rules are complex.

    • Secondly, out of a huge set of possibilities, you have to pick out the few that actually matter. Because of emergent behaviour (cannot work backwards from a result), there is no way to figure out which factors are significant by examining their products. We're left with trial and error based on educated guesses

    Despite any disagreements that Thornhill may have with Einstein, E=mc2 and the photoelectric effect are simple concepts that will likely stand the test of time. Any modifications will be additive, and we won't have to throw away E=mc2 like the way we'll have to throw away the notion of a black hole.
     
    digital likes this.
  16. NeilBB

    NeilBB New Member

    http://www.holoscience.com/wp/synopsis/synopsis-11-some-basics/

    Thornhill's view:
    Einstein's relativity equations have held up experimentally, as has the quantum theory! But the interpretation of those equations and their application to reality is a different matter. Look at the collapse of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics now underway. I think the implications of General Relativity will also be in trouble soon. I think Jack would agree with that. Special Relativity may be a different story. Its equations will hold up for sure, but will their meaning as they are now understood in terms of spacetime? I don't know...
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2014
    Josh and Josh (Paleo Osteo) like this.
  17. Josh

    Josh Gold

  18. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    The more massive an object, the more the electrostatic force contributes to the elastic deformation (anyone say compliant design or the quantum mechanism?) of its protons, neutrons and electrons, rather than their acceleration. Remember magnetism results when electrons are slowed in their orbits around a nucleus.........cold and an electric charge are capable of this action.

    The bigger, more massive, more mass an object has is only to offset the energy loses to the environment surrounding it because of a LACK of an electric charge. Kleiber's Law 101. Second Law of thermodynamics 101, and the law of how evolution really works 101.

    You might want to remember that line someday down the road when we get to talking about H+ in that mitochondrial matrix.
     
    NeilBB likes this.
  19. NeilBB

    NeilBB New Member

    But he claims that "mass" and "matter" are generally considered equivalent concepts and that this assumption may not necessarily be correct...

    He also implies that if electrostatic forces are really responsible for gravity (as you and I and he all believe), then Einstein's idea of a warped spacetime becomes completely superfluous...
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2014
  20. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    nope. They are not. It is akin to saying mass and weight are the same. They are not. Mass on Earth weighs different amounts then on the Moon. The mass is the EXACTLY the same in both locations of space, but the relationship to the electrostatic forces on that mass is what differs. That difference is seen in weight. This is why we weigh more at the poles then we do on the equator too.........few seem to know that relationship exists even here on earth.

    Why? This is where high energy cosmic electrostatics enter the ionosphere and cause some disturbance and make you get fatter there relatively.
     

Share This Page