Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Hidden Science & Advanced Technology

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 14-02-2011, 02:58 PM   #41
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
What does the arrow annotated by L represent in the physical world?



It is not a force, so what is it?

And why does it change sense according to rotation direction?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_momentum
That's due to the principle of conservation of angular momentum; and it is the same principle that makes a gyroscope keep itself in perfect balance.


Last edited by flyermay; 14-02-2011 at 03:00 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:09 PM   #42
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
Here is a quasar image



Like several I have studied it has a central source and is accompanied by two masses equidistant from and co-axial with the centre

What causes the axial emanations to be arrested at a certain distance from the core?
Not sure I understand what you are asking. Do you want to know why the emissions are only visible a certain distance from the origin, or if something is stopping/slowing those emissions?

There should be nothing stopping those emissions, but the reasons why there are not visible at certain distances I believe it is due to dispersion and temperature (they don't emit light anymore).
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:12 PM   #43
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fekdemasons View Post
Why cant we lick our own genitals ?


It's because God, in its infinite wisdom, provided us with a Vertebral column so that we would dedicate our lives to more productive activites.

Last edited by flyermay; 14-02-2011 at 08:37 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:17 PM   #44
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hadabusa View Post
are spiders insects?

see "camel spiders "
They belong to the same phylum as insects; but their subphyla is Chelicerata, while insects belong to the subphylum Hexapoda. So no, they are not.

Camel spiders also belong to the subphylum Chelicerata, as well as all other archnids.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:27 PM   #45
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarok View Post
Here's a question: if all galaxies are the result of the grouping together of matter propelled at barely imaginable speed after the Big Bang, how can galaxies cross each others paths? If, as I've read somewhere, galaxies are speeding up, how can a weak force like gravity overcome this momentum?
The speed at which matter was propelled from the big bang is not a problem, since the matter in the same clusters would reletaive seem as it was stand still.

When galaxies cross each other's path they interact: sometimes forming even bigger galaxies, sometimes just moving the stars around, and some times pulling many stars out in space and disrupting the whole galaxy.

everything is speeding up, not only galaxies. This has nothing to do with either of the 4 forces of the universe; it is the universe that is expanding, with all the matter and forces in it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarok View Post
Here's another one: if "space" has no effect in slowing down matter moving within it, if a bullet was fired out into deep space, would it retain a constant speed until it hit another object? Would it also have a maximum speed that it could possibly reach?
Yes, it would continue in a straight line and at a constant speed for ever and ever. The maximum speed would be the one at which it was shot; unless another force made it speed up; like the gravitational attraction of any massive object.

Last edited by flyermay; 14-02-2011 at 04:22 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:28 PM   #46
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
That's due to the principle of conservation of angular momentum; and it is the same principle that makes a gyroscope keep itself in perfect balance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cquvA_IpEsA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cquvA_IpEsA
I know about the conservation of angular momentum. I asked what the L arrow is supposed to represent, and why it changes sense with rotation

hint: it is a 'tensor'
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:32 PM   #47
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by indica View Post
What is dark matter and what is it's purpose..?

still looking for this one
I find your question truly interesting, and I would really like to give you the answer you are looking for. But...

The best exaplanation so far to what dark matter is, is: a term to describe what we don't understand.

About its purpose: science doesn't answer that sort of questions, it is a question better suited for religion.

Last edited by flyermay; 14-02-2011 at 04:24 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:33 PM   #48
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
Not sure I understand what you are asking. Do you want to know why the emissions are only visible a certain distance from the origin, or if something is stopping/slowing those emissions?

There should be nothing stopping those emissions, but the reasons why there are not visible at certain distances I believe it is due to dispersion and temperature (they don't emit light anymore).
Well I have an answer. There is a force acting outwards from the poles of the spinning core. This is not merely an 'ejection' force. It is a force that falls off with distance. At the lobe collection points this force is balanced by gravity.

Next question is - what could this force be? I suggest it is the mass analogue of the magnetic field. The lines of such a field would collimate ejecta, in effect creating a net gravity well axially outwards from the quasar
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:33 PM   #49
andyh
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: West Cork, Ireland
Posts: 18,036
Likes: 5 (2 Posts)
Default

Here's a good one for ya.
Where the hell are the results of the Allais effect experiment from China in 2009?

FYI:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/...y-anomaly.html

Can't find the results. :/
andyh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:47 PM   #50
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
I know about the conservation of angular momentum. I asked what the L arrow is supposed to represent, and why it changes sense with rotation

hint: it is a 'tensor'


Here is a list of what all variables represent:
F = force
τ = torque
p = momentum
L = angular momentum
The reason why it changes direction is because of the torque (τ), which is a measure of the turning force on an object such as a nut or a bolt (like the one on the central axis of the animation you posted). When you turn a nut or a bolt in one direction, it exerts a force either up or down along its axis; and when you turn it in the opposite direction, it exerts the same force also in the opposite direction of its axis.

Last edited by flyermay; 14-02-2011 at 08:40 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:51 PM   #51
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
Well I have an answer. There is a force acting outwards from the poles of the spinning core. This is not merely an 'ejection' force. It is a force that falls off with distance. At the lobe collection points this force is balanced by gravity.
So, if you knew the answer; why did you ask?

Told you I wasn't sure what you were asking anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
Next question is - what could this force be? I suggest it is the mass analogue of the magnetic field. The lines of such a field would collimate ejecta, in effect creating a net gravity well axially outwards from the quasar
You know the answer already?

Are you trying to sabotage this thread.

Last edited by flyermay; 14-02-2011 at 04:18 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 03:55 PM   #52
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andyh View Post
Here's a good one for ya.
Where the hell are the results of the Allais effect experiment from China in 2009?

FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allais_effect

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...y-anomaly.html

Can't find the results. :/
Well, what the Chinese do with the results of their experiments is not a question about science that I can answer.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 04:18 PM   #53
andyh
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: West Cork, Ireland
Posts: 18,036
Likes: 5 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
Well, what the Chinese do with the results of their experiments is not a question about science that I can answer.
lol unfortunately yep.
The daft thing is I can find all sorts of stuff thats not been kept hidden by scientists the world over..it seems as if this 1 subject is taboo for some odd reason.
andyh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 04:27 PM   #54
bard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 817
Likes: 79 (50 Posts)
Default

flyermay, you are certainly a brave man to take such a challenge, I respect you for that

But do not fall in the trap of looking at the surface of things.

Your explanation of why we see only one side of the Moon is correct - it is due to the 1:1 spin-orbit resonance of the Moon, but you made it sound too trivial - gravity and inertia just happen to synchronize. This spin-orbit resonance is actually a highly unusual fact, conservative systems do not normally end up in resonance states. People who know better usually explain the effect in terms of dissipative factors (friction due to tides caused by the Earth's pull on the Moon) which slowed down the spin of the Moon in the course of millions of years till it reached its present state.
But people how know even better will point out that the entire Solar System is a highly tuned resonance system. For example the ratio of the angular velocities at perihelion and aphelion of any planet (including the Moon) is a ratio that belongs to the musical scale. For example for the Earth, the ratio is like that of the frequencies of tones Fa and Mi. This fact was rediscovered by Johannes Kepler and discussed at great length in "The Harmony of the World", which in itself is the most remarkable scientific work ever written. Those who know yet better will see here manifestation of a Law of the Universe, known in esoteric circles as the Law of Seven, or the Law of Octaves.

Now regarding the Big Bang question and the galaxies colliding, again matters are not so trivial. I think that the meaning of the question was "if galaxies are supposed to be running away (according to the mainstream interpretation of the red shift in the galaxy spectrum) then how come that some galaxies are in fact moving towards each other and even collide. Mainstream cosmologists usually want to have it both ways and brush aside these kinds of questions with some convoluted explanation which is always wrong. Do not put any faith in the so called Big Bang hypothesis, it is a naive reductionist view, a toxic brew cooked up by the wicked cleverness of the Jesuits and the irrational dogmatic Jewish mind.

Regarding rodin's question on the quasar arrangement I have nothing to offer but speculations:
1) Read Halton Arp's book "Seeing Red: Reshifts, Cosmology and Academic Science", he puts forward some plausible ideas.
2) Read this, may give you some ideas: http://users.navi.net/~rsc/krafft.html

I do not understand rodin's question on the angular momentum. Traditionally angular momentum is considered to be a pseudo-vector - its direction is determined by convention based on the asymmetry between left-handedness and right-handedness in living organisms.

Here is a graph showing an almost linear relationship between the internal specific luminosity of the planets (plus satellites) in the Solar System and their specific (per kg) angular momentum.

It is from Richard Hoagland's site (the section on hyperdimensional Physics).
This graph made me think a great deal, but I have no explanation for it.
__________________
"I will place it where it will not be recognized by the foolish, nor ignored by the Sons of the Doctrine, for it is the key, the perfection and the end."
Turba Philosophorum
bard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 04:30 PM   #55
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andyh View Post
lol unfortunately yep.
The daft thing is I can find all sorts of stuff thats not been kept hidden by scientists the world over..it seems as if this 1 subject is taboo for some odd reason.
Quite an interesting effect. Why do you think it happens; and why do you think they don't want to make it public?

Last edited by flyermay; 14-02-2011 at 04:30 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 04:32 PM   #56
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by bard View Post
flyermay, you are certainly a brave man to take such a challenge, I respect you for that

But do not fall in the trap of looking at the surface of things.

Your explanation of why we see only one side of the Moon is correct - it is due to the 1:1 spin-orbit resonance of the Moon, but you made it sound too trivial - gravity and inertia just happen to synchronize. This spin-orbit resonance is actually a highly unusual fact, conservative systems do not normally end up in resonance states. People who know better usually explain the effect in terms of dissipative factors (friction due to tides caused by the Earth's pull on the Moon) which slowed down the spin of the Moon in the course of millions of years till it reached its present state.
But people how know even better will point out that the entire Solar System is a highly tuned resonance system. For example the ratio of the angular velocities at perihelion and aphelion of any planet (including the Moon) is a ratio that belongs to the musical scale. For example for the Earth, the ratio is like that of the frequencies of tones Fa and Mi. This fact was rediscovered by Johannes Kepler and discussed at great length in "The Harmony of the World", which in itself is the most remarkable scientific work ever written. Those who know yet better will see here manifestation of a Law of the Universe, known in esoteric circles as the Law of Seven, or the Law of Octaves.

Now regarding the Big Bang question and the galaxies colliding, again matters are not so trivial. I think that the meaning of the question was "if galaxies are supposed to be running away (according to the mainstream interpretation of the red shift in the galaxy spectrum) then how come that some galaxies are in fact moving towards each other and even collide. Mainstream cosmologists usually want to have it both ways and brush aside these kinds of questions with some convoluted explanation which is always wrong. Do not put any faith in the so called Big Bang hypothesis, it is a naive reductionist view, a toxic brew cooked up by the wicked cleverness of the Jesuits and the irrational dogmatic Jewish mind.

Regarding rodin's question on the quasar arrangement I have nothing to offer but speculations:
1) Read Halton Arp's book "Seeing Red: Reshifts, Cosmology and Academic Science", he puts forward some plausible ideas.
2) Read this, may give you some ideas: http://users.navi.net/~rsc/krafft.html

I do not understand rodin's question on the angular momentum. Traditionally angular momentum is considered to be a pseudo-vector - its direction is determined by convention based on the asymmetry between left-handedness and right-handedness in living organisms.

Here is a graph showing an almost linear relationship between the internal specific luminosity of the planets (plus satellites) in the Solar System and their specific (per kg) angular momentum.

It is from Richard Hoagland's site (the section on hyperdimensional Physics).
This graph made me think a great deal, but I have no explanation for it.
Oh I know... but please have a look first at the background of Steevo's question: http://davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=157498 and you will understand.

In regards to the moon, there is something that doesn't fit (mods, please prevent Steevo from seeing this part of the discussion ). If the moon is getting further away from earth; how come it keeps its orbit and spin syncronized? You see, as it is further from earth, the orbit should have take longer, and the spin should remain the same; therefore, provoking the de-syncronization of both.

Good post Bard, thanks for giving me a hand expanding these questions.

Last edited by flyermay; 14-02-2011 at 06:00 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 04:33 PM   #57
tinyint
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Meerkat Manor
Posts: 20,776
Likes: 9 (8 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
If you are talking about the forces that keep atoms together, those are the strong force (which keeps the nucleus of atoms together), and the electromagnetic force (which keeps electrons around the nucleus).

A charge does not produce energy; it releases the energy it has accumulated.

An electric current flows from a place with a higher charge to a place with a lower charge; it doesn’t get or produce energy from anywhere –only transfers it; that’s what’s called an electric current-.



Doesn't contradict anything Tinyint; it only looks to you like it's contradicting something because you are not a physicist (no offense intended; I'm also not a physicist ).
No offence, you didn't even get what I asked you, you universal genius.
And its not necessary that you assume things about me, you don't simply know.

We are getting here in the very matter why our physics is so flawed.

Where does the energy in an electric current(circuit) come from?

I'll give you a hint and thus the answer:

Every charge in the universe already emits steadily and unhindered electro-magnetic energy into the 3d space, without knowing where the energy comes from. Thus it contradicts the law of conservation of energy.
All electromagnetic fields and charges as well as their energy come from these charge-sources. This states classic electro-dynamics.
How does that fit into the conservation of energy?

The only solution to that problem and contradiction is, that not observable virtual electromagnetic mass and energy of the charge-source continuously absorb energy from the vacuum, which is converted into real observable energy. This can be then measured as electromagnetic energy in 3d space which is emitted in all directions, which leads to the corresponding fields and potentials in the whole universe.




Lets get even deeper into that, shall we? Tesla and (Vortex)Aether physics that is. Hilgenberg for example postulated that as well.

Last edited by tinyint; 14-02-2011 at 04:41 PM.
tinyint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 04:44 PM   #58
andyh
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: West Cork, Ireland
Posts: 18,036
Likes: 5 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
Quite an interesting effect. Why do you think it happens; and why do you think they don't want to make it public?
Because it would prove some of the earlier "aether" ideas.
andyh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 04:51 PM   #59
the lost
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Under your bed
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 61 (22 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
They belong to the same phylum as insects; but their subphyla is Chelicerata, while insects belong to the subphylum Hexapoda. So no, they are not.

Camel spiders also belong to the subphylum Chelicerata, as well as all other archnids.
Thats cheating, now you're just making words up

I hope your spacturiumition gets wet
the lost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-02-2011, 04:53 PM   #60
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the lost View Post
Thats cheating, now you're just making words up

I hope your spacturiumition gets wet
Ohhhh shit... why did you have to uncover it; everyone fell for it!!!
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:07 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.