Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
1
Can you please point out One straight line that makes up an atom.
Everything is spherical and travels in an arc.
The rate of arc can be so great, that from your relative perception, it
Seems as if it's a straight line, but when you truly investigate, you see it's
not really straight.
It's a bunch of arcs compacted together and when you zoom out, you see
the total sum of the parts.
2
through the notion that there are no straight lines.))
No 2D in our 3D reality.
It’s a blank graph…. where are the other stars and planets?
If that’s a model of a black hole…. where are the particles?
Or at least the affect of the particles on the graph.
Please tell me what travels in a straight line through space with zero
influence from other gravity like in that graph.
I believe there is a force other than gravity which causes objects to spin
and rotate WHILE they gravitate towards or away from something. My
make believe word for this is "vortation."
Gravity is attracting / repelling.
Vortating is spinning.
2 different things.
Look at Phi.... look at nature. Everything spirals. Why don’t the current
models of space have any spin? It doesn’t seem natural even as an
example. Their model’s are fiction. Look at nature:
3
And why does their grid show ANY straight lines if it's representing 3D
space?!?!?
Get rid of the grid altogether, but if you want to use it as an example, then
change the grid to look like the surface of an ever moving ocean.... not a
frozen lake.
On your relative scale, an arc may appear flat, but it's not on the grand
scheme of things.
A still image of a frozen lake isn’t missing much action.
A still image of the ocean will show ripples and variation. No flatness at
any given time you click the camera.
And NO part of the ocean is perfectly flat since the Earth is round and
water flows Around the surface.
And the picture models of the universe are stagnant. A picture is frozen in
time.
The ocean is not frozen in time!
The picture models would need to constantly move and change in order to
be accurate.
And if it did that... then it wouldn't be flat and stagnant.
4
All of the pictures for the current models of space are only a flash in time.
Just like taking a picture of you with a camera. That one picture doesn't
represent your whole life.... only a moment of your life.
All of the current models of space only represent the fabric of space-time
as a frozen lake and when something sits on the frozen lake the ice bends
and creates a depression in the meniscus of the water as if it was liquid.
How can the frozen meniscus of water bend as if it's liquid? It simply can't.
And how can even the liquid meniscus of water be flat if the molecules
making up that water are not flat themselves?
What you are seeing is the total sum of the parts which gives the false
impression of a 2 dimensional interpretation for your 3D observation.
What you are seeing is water frozen in time on your scale, but when you
look in another dimension (microscope) you see the reality.
5
The current models of space are saying the meniscus of space-time
(Fabric) can't be broken.
Can the surface of water ever be broken?
Of course. The amount of force required to break the meniscus is what we
call surface tension.
The current models of space are saying that we are all floating on the
surface of an ocean but there is nothing beneath the meniscus, or fabric?
This is another reason why I have trouble with the term "fabric" of space-
time, or the mattress theory.
Only computer models and holograms can show you the reality of our 3D
space-time.
6
First of all... why is space represented as flat?
What is that person standing on?
And I think that guy standing there must be god because only he could
stand on a non existent flat surface.
If you can't make a hole in water and bend water around like the picture
above... how can you compare the fabric of space-time, to an ocean?
If you're going to draw a flat line on paper, roll the paper up like a scroll
since that represents the true path of an object in space.
Or put the paper in front of a fan so that it's constantly blowing and
rippling.
The rate of inclination is sooo small, that from your relative perception it
SEEMS as if they are traveling parallel. But if you were able to witness it for
eternity... those objects would crash into each other before an eternity.
Even if those two object were the only two existing objects in the universe,
7
they would STILL intersect because they each have a gravitational pull on
one another.
That pull will eventually cause an intersection.
Since your point of origin never remains stationary, you might actually need
a spherical coordinate system that constantly rotates in an ever-changing
phi spiral.
There are no flat lines and no flat space in a spherical coordinate system.
And even a spherical coordinate system doesn't account for spin.
All the models of the universe I see, only account for a Cartesian view on
space.
Where is the rotation?
Where is the arc?
Where does phi come into play?
8
It's natural and it's a force other than gravity.
I feel that Gravity and Vortation go hand in hand like Space and Time.
Space-time..... Gravity-spin.
And a pic of John Searl's device called the SEG (Searl Effect Generator) The
magnets, rollers, stator ring, etc are composed of arcs. No straight lines.
9
I used to think space was flat, then I thought it was a sprial, then I though
it was a sphere.
Now I don't think space is made of anything at all.
There is no fabric. Only forces within the void which act upon corporeal
objects.
All things are on their own path down a vortex.
Newton says, "All objects travel on a straight path until an outside force
acts upon them."
Well, I don't think so.
I sense that All objects Would travel in a straight line through space-time
if it wasn't for gravity-spin.
Since there is always some gravity from background radiation in the
deepest parts of space, there will always be spin to couple that gravity.
I completely agree with Newton when he said, "For every action there is an
equal and opposite reaction."
For the "action" of space the equal and opposite reaction would be time.
For the "action" of gravity, the equal and opposite reaction would be spin.
I don't believe in the flat space model as if space was like a mattress.
There is no floor in space, no grid, and no fabric of space-time. And if
there is... it's probably not flat.
10
There must be a force to balance out another force.
Those 2 particles can be so far away from each other that you would
never realize they are associated in a binary orbit.
Almost like the biblical tale of Noah.
Everything travels 2 by 2 in an ark.
"Binary Vortation"
Perhaps this is where the notion of infinite probability comes into play?
There seems to be an infinite amount of directions you can go from any
one given point in space-time.
Therefore any place you start from is a neutral point to something or
someplace else.
So if you shined a really powerful laser beam that could reach the distance
of the universe... you would see it arcs around planets and stars like a
sine wave.
The phi spiral is a pretty simple concept. Even though I believe in god, I
think intersecting spirals is a simpler concept than god.
Most people's Occam's Razor is god because its the simplest solution, so
therefore people think it must be the correct one.
--Jason Verbelli
11