The Myth of Gravity: Concept Versus Theory
(Partially Derived From Lee Venables Ideas)
Gravity isn’t even a theory, not a scientific theory at all, but rather, merely a concept. In essence, a concept is a general idea or notion, while a theory is a more developed explanation or model for a set of phenomena. Concepts are building blocks, whereas theories are structured systems that explain relationships between these concepts. Another example, there has been no scientific experiment to prove the cause of things falling down as the result of mass attracting mass, theoretically subjugated by an imaginary spinning molten core in the center of an imaginary ball Earth. It’s all wild speculation and merely a concept, but not s theory. Additionally, it is literally an unfalsifiable claim because nobody has ever been to the center of this imaginary ball Earth to test this gravitational hypotheses.
It’s all wild speculation. Additionally, it is literally an unfalsifiable claim because nobody has ever been to the center of this imaginary ball Earth to test this gravitational hypotheses.
Concepts Are:
Abstract Ideas:
Concepts are abstract ideas or mental representations that categorize objects, events, or situations.
Building Blocks:
They are the fundamental units of thought and can be used to build more complex ideas or theories.
Less Developed:
Concepts are typically less developed than theories and may not have extensive supporting evidence.
Theories Are:
Explanations:
Theories are frameworks that explain observed phenomena, often involving relationships between multiple concepts.
Models:
They are models or systems of ideas that provide a structured way of understanding events or situations.
Testable:
Theories are developed through observation, experimentation, and analysis and can be tested and refined with new evidence.
Rigorous:
Theories are subjected to rigorous testing and are considered more robust than individual concepts.
Hence, Gravity, as defined in modern academia, is a concept of the 4th dimensional pseudo Riemannian bending of space and time, caused by the uneven distribution of mass in a geodesic framework. It’s purely a mathematical construct and concept, born from the mind of plagiarist, Albert Einstein.
You cannot apply practical science using the scientific method to a concept. The scientific method requires a physical environment in which to test your independent variable and hypothesis, which must be a real physical thing and not merely an abstract concept. As such, Einstein’s nonsensical and imaginary 4th dimensional pseudo Riemannian bending of space and time concept was literally invented to save the Heliocentric concept from complete demolition over 110 years ago, and is heavily contested in academia today because it falls apart at the quantum scale.
It’s important to educate people to stop calling Gravity a theory because it is not a theory. It is simply a concept, which cannot be tested using the empirical scientific method. Also, anytime scientists attempt to test for Gravitational attraction, they can never wholly isolate their independent variable, and so, they can never entirely rule out the role of object density, atmospheric density, atmospheric pressure, buoyancy, electrostatic effects, electromagnetic effects, or dielectric effects etc…as possible causes for downward vectors.
In fact, more empirically speaking, objects fall or rise due to the relationship, ratio, and dynamism between:
1. Object Density
2. The Index of Buoyancy of an Object
3. Dielectric Forces
4. Electrostatic Attraction
5. Ferrous and Non-Ferrous Magnetism
6. Electromagnetic Forces
7. Aerodynamic Resistance
8. Thermodynamic Exchange
9. The Result of an Object in a Particular Atmospheric Medium
10. The “Aetheric Wind” (Luminiferous Aether)
Again, Gravity is no longer defined as mass attracting mass as described by Newtonian rhetoric, and was superseded by Einstein in 1915 in his publication, “General Theory of Relativity”. Einstein did not apply any practical science using the scientific method to his conceptual mathematical framework because it cannot be done, yet masses of people still believe that Einstein’s Theory of Relativity has some scientific validity or real credibility. It does not. It’s all mathematical wizardry based upon conceptual fantasy. Einstein’s field equations, which were published in November of 1915, were purely mathematical and only offer a description of the imaginary warping and bending of spacetime in a 4th dimensional concept. Contrariwise, Natural Science, which is based in the real 3-dimensional world that we all inhabit, provides theories by following the scientific method, and Natural Science cannot be adulterated by mathematical concepts. It stands firmly upon the grounds of testable, repeatable, demonstratable, and scalable conditions and parameters.
All Fictional Einsteinian Nonsense:
The Myth of Gravity and Newton’s Fictional Downward Force Vector in Terms of Gravity Versus Weightlessness: Newton’s Gravitational Model Refutes Itself
Often Heliocentrists confuse weightlessness with Gravity. They sometimes say, with respect to objects in orbit, “They are in free fall and therefore Gravity is cancelled.”, which illustrates their lack of understanding of Newtonian Mechanics, for the concept of Gravity does not get cancelled in this model.
Heliocentrists are conflating two different situations:
1. Gravity, which is a derivation of acceleration, spherical symmetry, and static mass.
2. Weightlessness, which is a derivation of hypothetical acceleration, directional vectors, and falling mass.
According to The Heliocentric Model, there is a shared gravitational property to all matter, which accounts for what we call, “the gravitational force”. Gravity is thought to be the result of an invisible, unconfirmed, theoretical particle known as The Quantum Graviton. When we consider the homogeneous summation of these collective molecular vectors, resulting in the spherical symmetry of Earth, all the horizontal components cancel out, resulting in an amalgamated downward force towards the center of The Earth. This is the erroneous model that we have been presented with by modern science.
In this erroneous model, the overall Spherical Symmetry of The Earth is an assumption that Heliocentrists operate beneath in order to derive various mathematical models concerning the way in which upward, and side to side gravitational vectors cancel out in a spherical model, resulting in the downward force called gravitational acceleration.
Flat Earthers Don't Understand Gravity?:
In other words, in this gravitational model, Gravity is literally conferred to mass by virtue of its presence, while mass is literally imbued with gravitational attraction by virtue of its specific Gravity. It’s a classic dog-chasing-its-tail, chicken-or-the-egg, self-recursive feedback loop of nonsensical paradox. In this model, there is no way to isolate nor determine which comes first, mass, or gravitational attraction. Together, they are not mutually exclusive variables, meaning that they are two events that happen simultaneously, and by extension, independently, with neither dependent upon the other, which completely contradicts Newton’s gravitational model, and therefore, nullifies both as mutually derivative events, thereby resulting in logical absurdities.
Quantum Gravity and the Quantum Graviton
In order to escape the logical absurdities inherent within the “mass needs Gravity to exists/Gravity needs mass to exist” contingency paradox, Scientism Priests invented the idea of the Quantum Graviton in the hopes of imbuing within matter some modicum of gravitational attraction, independent of the independent of mass.
Since this idea of the Quantum Graviton does not mathematically correlate with the Cartesian world of Newtonian Gravitational Mechanics, with its necessity of mass to mass equivalence, they were forces to define their new gravitational explanation as an invisible, unquantifiable, unverifiable, non-material property, intrinsic to only an unseen quantum level. In this way, they could simply attribute gravitational properties to matter, independent to the size of the mass involved, which is how they were able to abandon Newton’s physical world of observable bodies and events.
In theories of quantum gravity, the graviton is the hypothetical quantum of gravity, an elementary particle that mediates the force of gravitational interaction. There is no complete quantum field theory of gravitons due to an outstanding mathematical problem with renormalization in general relativity. In string theory, believed by some to be a consistent theory of quantum gravity, the graviton is a massless state of a fundamental string.
In theories of Quantum Gravity, the Graviton is supposed to be an hypothetical quantum of gravity, which is an elementary particle that mediates the force of gravitational interaction between events. There is no complete quantum field theory of Gravitons due to an outstanding mathematical problem with renormalization in General Relativity. In string theory, believed by some to be a consistent Theory of Quantum Gravity, the Graviton is a massless state of a fundamental string.
The three other known forces of nature are mediated by elementary particles: electromagnetism by the photon, the strong interaction by gluons, and the weak interaction by the W and Z bosons. All three of these forces appear to be accurately described by the Standard Model of particle physics.
In the classical limit, a successful theory of Gravitons would reduce to General Relativity, which itself reduces to Newton's Law of Gravitation in the weak-field limit, thereby demonstrating a kind of succession of gravitational models that Scientism Priests are forever trying to reconcile, but fail to do so. Ultimately, everything these Scientism Priests postulate is filled with so much conjecture, assumption, hypothesis, paradox, contradiction, and mathematical sleight -of-hand as to be intolerably obsolescent and sufficiently impractical for the task of predicting physical behaviors or explaining real events.
Lastly, even if the Graviton did exist, it would be expected to be massless because the gravitational force that they are attributing it to has a very long range, and appears to propagate at the speed of light. And so, in their insanely paradoxical model, a massless quantum entity is said to confer gravitational effects to mass, such that mass can arise as an epiphenomenal effect of gravitational attraction.
Got that?
Yeah, neither to they.
Meanwhile, Back in Newton’s Observable World
The acceleration of a falling object on Earth is 9.8 m/s/s. This value, known as “the acceleration of Gravity”, is the same for all falling objects regardless of how long they have been falling, or whether they were initially dropped from rest or thrown up into the air. Nevertheless this variable, 9.8 m/s/s, does not literally or actually describe gravitational acceleration, but rather, it merely describes the rate at which objects fall. Extrapolating that this descriptive variable is connected to Gravity is the signature of those intoxicated with The Copernican Principle, and it is not anchored in empirical observation nor the scientific method.
Subsequently, although Newton’s mathematical descriptions do apply to falling bodies because the math “works”, this does not imply that the causal force behind Newton’s mathematics is necessarily Gravity. In other words, Newton’s math is descriptive, but not necessarily nor epistemologically antecedent to any directional causal vectors.
In fact, more empirically speaking, objects fall or rise due to the relationship, ratio, and dynamism between:
1. Object Density
2. The Index of Buoyancy of an Object
3. Dielectric Forces
4. Electrostatic Attraction
5. Ferrous and Non-Ferrous Magnetism
6. Electromagnetic Forces
7. Aerodynamic Resistance
8. Thermodynamic Exchange
9. The Result of an Object in a Particular Atmospheric Medium
10. The “Aetheric Wind” ( Luminiferous Aether)
At no point is Gravity necessary, advantageous, causal, nor mechanically derivable in order to calculate and describe physical bodies in motion. Newton’s math describes physical behavior, not causal forces. All of Newton’s Laws of Motion, including the math behind them, work perfectly fine without complicating matters with the idea of a fictional force pulling objects towards the center of the Earth.
And so, Heliocentrists are confused concerning what Gravity is supposed to be versus what weightlessness is, which is a classic Heliocentric blunder.
My advice to Heliocentrists is to be a little less arrogant until they actually understand what they are talking about, and have a better grasp on physics, and in particular, vector, mass, and acceleration equations.
The Myth of Gravity Available at Barnes and Noble:
Nikola Tesla Exposes the Einsteinian and Quantum Delusions of Gravity, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and Relativity as Illogical Nonsense
You Tube Transcript and Additional Writings Derived from Theoria Apophasis:
It's astonishing all the garbage we're taught in school, and it turns out to be a complete and total lie. The people who actually spawn those agendas to propagate the nonsense and the lies that we're supposed to believe in every commercial and everything we actually see in the media makes Einstein out to be almost alien, like some super intelligence, and the truth turns out to be something very different, and totally the opposite.
Let's go on to and quote Nikola Tesla, and actually talk about what he said, relative to Einstein. I'd actually like to point out, and I think there's more than five books written on this subject alone, about where Einstein actually got his sources from. There’s a lot of free material about Einstein, and it's on archive.org…all the stuff that you think Einstein was brilliant for is actually stolen by Einstein in his patent office, and taken from Jules Henri Poincaré.
TESLA on Einstein, & AGAINST Relativity & Space Time:
Jules Henri Poincaré was a French mathematician, theoretical physicist, engineer, and philosopher of science. He is often described as a polymath, and in mathematics as "The Last Universalist", since he excelled in all fields of the discipline as it existed during his lifetime. Jules Henri Poincaré was noted as a genius in a prestigious publication from Princeton University Press. Nikola Tesla comes close to foaming at the mouth against Einstein and his Relativity fantasy, and this idea of curve Space Time, and I'm going to read a little thing here from Nikola Tesla. This is relates to how Einstein, for years, developed formulas explaining the mechanism of The Cosmos, and doing so, he's overlooked many important factors regarding how heavenly bodies are increasing in distance from the Sun. This is the same as writing a business letter and forgetting the subject you wish to write about, relative to Einstein and when he's talking about.
The Cosmological Constant, which Einstein, even himself, discounted, is revealed by Tesla when he says in order to explain this phenomena, Einstein has invented the quantity Lambda. In Cosmology, The Cosmological Constant (usually denoted by the Greek capital letter lambda: Λ), alternatively called Einstein's Cosmological Constant, is the constant coefficient of a term that Albert Einstein temporarily added to his field equations of General Relativity. He later removed it. Much later it was revived and reinterpreted as the energy density of space, or vacuum energy, that arises in Quantum Mechanics. It is closely associated with the concept of dark energy. However, my theory of gravitation explains this phenomenon perfectly.
Nikola Tesla, in relationship to Relativity and Einstein, says in the presence of large bodies, the notion that space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to believe in such a view. Tesla also wrote a poem against Einstein. It's called, “The Fragments of Olympian Gossip”.
Tesla’s Opposition from Tesla Information Website:
Tesla disagreed with the findings of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity in a number of ways. As far back as the turn of the century, he thought that he had intercepted cosmic rays emanating from the Sun that attained velocities “vastly exceeding that of light.” In the last decade of his life he also claimed that these cosmic rays could be harnessed to generate electrical power. Tesla also saw radioactivity as evidence of the material body absorbing energy as much as it was giving it up.
On a separate front, the inventor stated that the impulses transmitted from his Wardenclyffe tower would also travel at velocities in excess of the speed of light. He likened the effect to the moon’s shadow spreading over the Earth.
It is exceedingly difficult to explicate the first two speculations concerning tachyonic cosmic rays and radioactivity. However, with regard to the third claim, this suggestion that he transmitted energy at speeds in excess of the speed of light can be discussed from a variety of points of view.
As the Earth has a diameter of roughly 25,000 miles, and light travels at about 186,000 miles/second, one can see that it would take light approximately 1/7th of a second to circle the Earth. But does the Earth itself exist in its own realm, that by the nature of its size transcends the speed of light? For example, does The North Pole, interact/exist with The South Pole, (which is actually The Antarctic Ice Wall Ring), instantaneously? If so, in a sense, the theory of Relativity is violated, as nothing, according to this theory, can “travel” faster than the speed of light.
Taking this concept a step further, in The Heliocentric Model, does the Solar System, or a galaxy, when perceived as a functional unit, interact with itself in some way that, by necessity, makes a mockery of the speed of light? In The Heliocentric Model, a Galaxy, of course, is millions of lightyears long. You can see they obvious paradox here. Certainly these systems have an orthorotational stability, and/or angular momentum, which exists as a gestalt in a realm that transcends the speed of light.
In an Interview in 1933, Tesla Discusses His View of Electromagnetic Energy:
The so-called Hertz waves are still considered a reality proving that light is electrical in its nature, and also that the ether is capable of transmitting transverse vibrations of frequencies however low. This view has become untenable since I showed that the universal medium is a gaseous body in which only longitudinal pulses can be propagated, involving alternating compressions and expansions similar to those produced by sound waves in the air. Thus, a wireless transmitter does not emit Hertz waves which are a myth, but sound waves in the ether, behaving in every respect like those in the air, except that, owing to the great elastic force and extremely small density of the medium, their speed is that of light.
Tom Bearden, a retired colonel and war games analyst, writes that a Tesla wave can obtain infinite velocity because it is really a primary stress of the space/time grid itself. This he defines as being associated with the classical idea of the scalar field (a set of interrelated points in space). This scalar field, (and/or vector potential), we remember, was eliminated from Maxwell’s equations by Hertz to do away with the concept of action at a distance.
Where a normal electromagnetic wave is transverse and proceeds as a vector from one point to another, a Tesla longitudinal wave theoretically produces an instantaneous disturbance of the entire scalar field and therefore achieves infinite velocities. The problem in understanding Tesla, Bearden says, occurs in the misunderstanding of basic definitions in physics regarding the terms scalar electrostatic potential (SEP) and voltage. Whereas voltage is a two-point function limited by lightspeed, the SEP is a one-point function and thus is an instantaneous interrelationship existing in space. The Tesla longitudinal wave is therefore fundamentally different than the normal electromagnetic wave.
Charles Yost Took a Less Exotic Approach to Solve the Problem:
There has been some controversy over the fact that Tesla referred to a velocity faster than the speed of light. However, the ratio of the velocity given by Tesla [471,240 km/sec] and the actual speed of light [299,792 km/sec] is the same as π/2. Thus, the Tesla value is probably relating a circumference phase wave speed.
Tesla appears to have actually been discussing two interrelated figures, one involved with the transmission of an electrical impulse straight through the Earth to the antipode (i.e., the diameter which is about 8,000 miles), and also the coincident circumference impulse (about 25,000 miles).
Thus, if he were sending a resonant Earth impulse through the planet from one end to the other, he was also saying that the effect would be simultaneously felt at all points around the circumference at the same time. This would therefore necessitate the requirement of velocities exceeding that of light.
Whether or not Tesla experimentally verified this cannot be ascertained by me.
However, in US Patent Number 787,412, applied for on May 16, 1900, Tesla states:
I have estimated... 0.08484 of a second... as the time taken in passing to and returning from the region diametrically opposite the pole over the Earth’s surface with a mean velocity of about 471,240 km/sec.
Today, we would interpret the 0.08484 second delay measurement as a determination of the range dependent parameter ß=.943 seconds, or more specifically, Tesla experimentally determined that:
ħΩ = 2.061 x 107
…where Ω is the conductivity parameter for the effective height, h, of the concentric shell model of the Earth-ionosphere cavity.
This result is in pleasant agreement with present observations.
--The Transient Propagation of ELF Pulses in the Earth-Ionosphere Cavity, by J. Corum and A-Hamid Adinejad, in the 1986 Int’l Tesla Symposium Proceedings, Steven Elswick (Ed), 1986, pp. 3-1 - 3-12.
The Structure of the Ether:
On a body as large as the Sun, it would be impossible to project a disturbance of this kind [e.g., radio broadcasts] to any considerable distance except along the surface. It might be inferred that I am alluding to the curvature of space supposed to exist according to the teachings of relativity, but nothing could be further from my mind.
I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved, is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.
--Nikola Tesla
In Tesla’s model, a force-field would curve the light around large bodies.
These ideas were related to Tesla’s original theories on Gravity which do not seem to have ever been published. They do coincide, however, with some of the most recent theories on physics, Gravity and magnetism. E. Lerner, writing about “Magnetic Whirlwinds” in Science Digest in 1985, stated that “magnetism is as fundamental as Gravity.” Citing the research and theories of plasma physicist A. Peratt of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Lerner noted:
Astronomers using radio telescope have observed filaments of gas arcing far above the galactic plane. These twisting spirals appeared to be held together by a magnetic field... stretching across 500 light years.... Such magnetic vortices may play a major role in the universe... as important... as gravitation.
A mystery which Tesla did not investigate, but which was solved by Einstein, refers to the paradoxical findings of Michelson and Morley, namely that the ether appeared not to exist, and further that the velocity of light was unaffected by the velocity of its source.
For example, if a person were in a car travelling at 60 mph and he threw a ball forward at a speed of 35 mph, at the same time that another person standing on the sidewalk also threw a ball forward at 35 mph, the ball coming from the person in the car would be hurtling through space at a total velocity of 60+35 or 95 mph, whereas the other ball, thrown by the stationary person, would only be travelling 35 mph. However if these same two individuals turned on and directed a beam of light forward at the same time, both light beams would travel at the same velocity, namely 186,000 miles/sec. The movement of the car would not affect the speed of light one iota. This finding violates common sense, as one would expect that the beam coming from the car would be travelling 60 mph faster than the beam emanating from the stationary source.
Rather than try to rearrange the data to fit the common sense notion, Einstein simply concluded that the speed of light had to be constant (according to the formulas of Special Relativity). He further concluded that the ether of 19th century physics was not necessary, and that it could not be detected with 19th century methods. Although at the time a radical view, it was soon widely accepted, as it implied that there was nothing between the stars. This concept quickly became dogma as it helped solve a number of dilemmas. “Einstein did not disprove the existence of the ether.... He only stated [in Special Relativity] that whether or not it existed, light would always travel at the same speed.
From the perspective of popular science writers, “belief in the non-existence of the ether remained alive, but in actuality, by 1916, Einstein had replaced the old ether in his theory of General Relativity by curved space-time itself. Only, this new “ether” is no longer a medium in three-dimensional Euclidean space, but in four-dimensional non-Euclidean (curved) space-time.” It was this idea that was completely unacceptable to Tesla, and he criticized Einstein in the 1930’s because of it.
One area where they were in some agreement, however, had to do with the speculations of the German physicist Ernest Mach. Taking his ideas from monotheistic and Buddhist teachings, and from Isaac Newton, who suggested that all material bodies attract one another through Gravity, Mach postulated that the mass of any material body, such as the Earth, was dependent upon some type of gravitational force from all the stars. In other words, all effects in the Universe were related to all others.
Einstein wrote Mach to tell him that this idea was intrinsically related to his formulation of the Theory of Relativity. It should be noted that Einstein had really postulated two theories. The Special Theory of Relativity postulated in 1905, dealt with uniform motions. The General Theory of Relativity, dealt with motions speeding up and slowing down. Mach’s principle is linked to the general theory.
I have yet to find a direct quote by Tesla of Mach’s Principle, but in an article Tesla wrote in 1915, clearly based upon his writings of 1893, he states exactly this position:
There is no thing endowed with life - from man, who is enslaving the elements, to the humblest creature - in all this world that does not sway in turn. Whenever action is born from force, though it be infinitesimal, the cosmic balance is upset and universal motion results.
It seems to me that the interconnectedness between all of the stars in the universe, (related to Einstein’s curved space/time), is the aether or a hierarchical dimension of it Further, each point in space (in a galaxy) codes for every other point as each contain the intersecting light from every star in the system. This idea is associated with holographic principles and the “enfolded order” where the whole is distributed throughout each part, as expounded by such theoreticians as David Bohm. See reference notes.
Similarly, Tesla’s view of the Aether aligned itself with that of the Theosophists:
Long ago, I recognized that all perceptible matter comes from a primary substance, of a tenuity beyond conception and filling all space - the Akasa or luminiferous ether - which is acted upon by the life-giving Prana or creative force, calling into existence, in never ending cycles, all things and phenomena.
The primary substance, thrown into infinitesimal whirls of prodigious velocity, becomes gross matter; the force subsiding, the motion ceases and matter disappears, reverting to the primary substance.
Removing the spiritual component from “Akasa”, Tesla postulated that everything in the universe derived its energy from external sources. This corresponded to his model of the automata, which received commands from the electrician, and also of himself, as a human. Denying the Platonic concept of innate ideas (and also intrinsic motivation), as an Aristotelian (ie, believing in the idea of the tabula rasa) paradoxically, Tesla still assumed whole-heartedly in self-determination and the power of the will.
Each hierarchical entity in his system was not endowed with a soul, per se, but rather, a self-directed electrical component which moved by attraction or repulsion. As an non-psychologist, Tesla also negated, by necessity, the concept of the unconscious, the archetypes, and also the Id, as primary motivators. So, for instance, a dream would always ultimately derive from some extrinsic factor. However, unlike Einstein, who negated the mental component from his model concerning the primary forces of the universe, Tesla addressed this factor with his construction of the first prototype of a thinking machine, his telautomaton.
Einstein, however, did not negate the conscious component from his philosophy. According to December 22, 1985 a Washington Post [ 12/22/1985] article by E. Mallove entitled, “Einstein’s Intoxication with God and the Cosmos,”
Einstein once stated:
I want to know how God created the world. I want to know his thoughts; the rest are details.
In essence, for Tesla, the mind was at its basis, a binary electrical system of attractions and repulsions, stimulated from an outside source, and wholly compatible with Pavlov’s stimulus-response reflex model for cognitive processes.
Smashing Atoms:
Tesla also differed with Einstein and the quantum physicists in his view of the structure of the elementary particles and the possible consequences caused by the smashing of atoms.
I have disintegrated atoms in my experiments with a high potential vacuum tube...operating it with pressures ranging from 4,000,000 to 18,000,000 million volts...But as to atomic energy, my experimental observations have shown that the process of disintegration is not accompanied by a liberation of such energy as might be expected from present theories.
To Tesla, the Theory of Relativity was just “a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense.
Nikola Tesla’s Famous Quotes About Einstein and Relativity:
“…a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense…the theory wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are Metaphysicists, rather than scientists.”
--Nikola Tesla
Writing a decade before the explosion of the atom bomb, and ignoring the highly questionable Space Curvature data from the 1919 eclipse and the explanation of Mercury’s anomalous orbit, which was falsely explained by Einstein’s theory, Tesla suggested that the existence of a force field would account for the same mathematical results.
Thus, Tesla concluded:
“Not a single one of the Relativity propositions have been proved.”
--Nikola Tesla (NYT, 7/11/1935, p. 23).
It would be shortsighted to simply judge “Tesla wrong and Einstein and the Quantum Physicists right” for at least two reasons. First, both Relativity and Quantum Theory have been established as incomplete, and in some sense, incompatible, theories on the structure of the universe.
Heinz Pagels states in his book, The Cosmic Code:
A principle of physics that Einstein held even more dear than determinism was the principle of local causality - that distant events cannot instantaneously influence local objects without mediation. What the EPR [Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen] argument did... was to show that quantum theory violated causality. This finding startled most physicists, because they held the principle of local causality sacred. This mean that either quantum physics was incomplete or non-local events [i.e., instantaneous information transmission] occurred.
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity is also incomplete, as physicists have not, as yet, obtained a Grand Unification Theory based upon it. See, for instance “Einstein’s Dream,” by Gary Taubes, Discover, 12/1983, p. 48, whereby an 11 dimensional graviton (Gravity particle) has been postulated as the ultimate particle to explain Supergravity, Quarks, Electrons, etc…
The First Practical Telautomaton:
A machine having all its bodily or translatory movements and the operations of the interior mechanism controlled from a distance without wires. The crewless boat shown in the photograph contains its own motive power, propelling- and steering- machinery, and numerous other accessories, all of which are controlled by transmitting from a distance, without wires, electrical oscillations to a circuit carried by the boat and adjusted to respond only to these oscillations.
--Problem of Increasing Human Energy Nikola Tesla (1901-Century Magazine)
The second issue to be considered is that Tesla was discussing these phenomena from a different perspective that was not completely analogous to the one espoused by the theoretical physicists. In Colorado Springs, for instance, Tesla was generating over 4,000,000 volts, whereas only about 1,000,000 volts is required for separating electrons from the nucleus of an atom. Thus, Tesla was able to disintegrate atoms, ‘but in an entirely different way than that postulated by Einstein or the quantum physicists (for Tesla did not destroy the nucleus). No atomic explosion could ever occur with this type of apparatus. Tesla completely misunderstood the ramifications of Einstein’s equation E = MC2, and the corresponding suppositions of the equivalence of mass and energy. Unfortunately, he did not live to see the proof that tremendous amounts of power were locked inside the tiny space occupied by the nuclei of atoms.
Concerning the curvature of space versus the idea of a force field, I discussed this point with Edwin Gora, Professor Emeritus, from Providence College. Gora, whose teachers include Werner Heisenberg and Arnold Sommerfeld, agreed that the two concepts might actually be different viable ways of describing the same thing. Furthermore, Tesla’s description of electromagnetic energy as being longitudinal, rather than transverse pulsations in the ether, is also comparable to Einstein’s description of light as quantum packets travelling through space.
Tesla’s cosmological speculations remain intriguing and may yet prove in some way helpful in developing new theories based upon relativity or quantum physics as both of these theories appear to be incomplete. A large number of thinking physicists believe that an ether of sorts exists, and that forces of some type may transcend lightspeed. Whether or not the present building blocks for a grand unification theory are sufficient to derive ultimate formulas remains to be seen.
Tesla Gave The Following Condemnation of Einstein at a Dinner Party:
“Einstein’s relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles, and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king... its exponents are brilliant men but they are Metaphysicists, rather than scientists.”
― Nikola Tesla
The writings and patents from Nikola Tesla were seized by the government, and Tesla was summarily killed. However common sense reveals that Einstein was, indeed, a beggar dressed in purple robes, and made King by his dazzling mathematics. Einstein’s idea of curved Space Time was never proven, and Einstein's idea of a Lambda was considered Einstein’s biggest blunder.
The Lambda Cosmological Constant was no longer necessary, and Tesla scrapped the idea. Relativity and The Quantum are a bunch of completely ludicrous nonsensical ideas, as well as the virtual particles that they keep calling Dark Matter or Dark Energy. This is not my view. This is in their own words. The reason they call it Dark Matter or Dark Energy is because they have no idea what it is that they are even talking about. That's not my opinion. That's what they themselves say about them.
They call it Dark Matter, the second half of which is matter, because they're Atomists mathematicians, which means they are not true scientists. They think everything is matter. When you're an Atomist, everything is matter, and composed of particles. When you're a hammer, everything's a nail, and so, this is the reason why they speak of the unproven and unseen speculations of Dark Matter and Dark Energy in terms of matter. Again, that's not my supposition. That's their own admission.
Essentially, what mode pseudoscientist are doing is saying this:
“I think it's matter, whatever it is, and regardless of what it actually turns out to be, because I think everything is matter as forgone presuppositional conclusion.”
And they call it “dark” because they have no idea what it is.
It is like saying:
“We cannot see it or even detect it, so it is invisible, and things that are invisible are essentially dark to us, and so we’ll call it Dark Matter.”
They don't understand that Tesla’s Field Theory explains the world far better than Atomistic Particle Theory. Nikola Tesla talks extensively about Electromagnetic Fields, an idea that correlates perfectly with everything we know about physical behavior and electricity. Nikola Tesla puts an end to the idle speculations and false conceptions that curved space is real. In other words, Einstein was, indeed, a fool in beggars clothing.
Tesla was saying that according to the Relativists, this unproven tendency for space to curve was owing to an inherent property or presence of celestial bodies, which granted some semblance of reality to their fantastic idea. However, it is still self-contradictory. Every action is accompanied by an equivalent reaction, and the effects of the latter are directly opposite to those of the former. In other words, it's completely untenable. There is no way that this Theory of Gravity, vis-a-vis Relativity and The Quantum Realm, can be true. Suppose that celestial bodies act upon surrounding space, causing curvature. Then that curved space must, in turn, react on the celestial bodies, themselves, producing the opposite effects. Therefore, that's straightened out the curve, since action and react reaction are coexistent.
It follows, therefore, that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible. But even if it existed, it would not explain the motions of celestial bodies as observed. This is the most crucial point. Only the existence of a Field can counter-space out for them, and it's assumption dispenses with the nonsense of space curvature. All literature on the subject of curved space and Relativity is futile and destined to oblivion, as are all attempts to explain the workings of The Cosmos without recognizing the existence of The Aether as a field that we operate within, and the indispensable function it plays in field phenomena.
This truth which can be expressed by this statement there is no energy and matter other than that which is received from the environment. When Tesla talks about the environment, he's actually talking about The Aetheric Field. Essentially, Tesla says there is no energy in atoms or gross matter other than that which it receives from The Aether, itself. In other words, when we talk about matter as a compound of hydrogen, and that hydrogen, itself, is just super high-energy light, that is one hundred percent in line with what Nikola Tesla has said regarding matter. We can then reference this to molecules and atoms, as well as the largest Heavenly bodies, where anything that fundamentally applies to matter, applies here, because all atoms and elements are compounds of hydrogen. This also necessatively applies to large Heavenly bodies, or anything with mass and magnitude, including so-called, “Gravity” As I've said before many countless times, Gravity is nothing other than non-point source, mutual mass acceleration which is no different than electrostatic cling. Take two towels, or pull them out of the laundry, and they're sticking together. And you hear that static cling when you pull them apart, the same field perturbation phenomena that is no different than what is being called “Gravity”.
Speaking in Term of The Heliocentric Model, Non-Point Source, Mutual Mass Acceleration and Counter Space:
It is no different than non-point source, mutual mass acceleration of so-called, “magnetic attraction”, which is not based in magnetism at all. Magnetism is the force vector of the loss of the energy of the dielectric. And dielectricity is, of course, increasing inertia acceleration towards no pressure, Inertia and no masses actually ever accelerate towards one another, observationally. Rather, they accelerate towards no pressure. In other words, there are no intrinsic attractive properties to matter, itself, which is essentially what the entire gravitational attraction hoax is based upon. The illusion of “mass attracts mass” in the celestial gravitational explanation of things is actually cloaking that magnetic attraction does not exist, and Heavenly bodies or masses in space, which is not Outer Space, are not accelerating towards one another. Rather, they are accelerating towards the lowest non-point of inertia between both, which is demonstrably observable with electromagnetic static, and accurately defines a field phenomenon, but not gravitation attraction between masses.
Nikola Tesla comes close to “losing it” or unhinging himself in regards to the idea of curved Space Time. For Tesla, space curvature was not a thing at all. For him, space has no properties. Space is no different than a shadow. It's basically an after effect of a divergent magnetic field. Space is not a thing, just like a shadow is not a thing. The word, “shadow” is a noun in the dictionary, but a shadow is not a thing. A shadow is the absence of light. It has no physical properties. It is the absence of any physical properties. As such it is counter space.
I’ll lastly leave you with the “Fragments of Olympian Gospel Gossip” by Nikola Tesla, a nice little poem from Nikola Tesla:
“Fragments of Olympian Gossip” is a poem that Nikola Tesla composed in the late 1920s for his friend, George Sylvester Viereck, an illustrious German poet and mystic. It made fun of the scientific establishment of the day.
Nikola Tesla (Serbian: Никола Тесла; 10 July 1856 – 7 January 1943) was an inventor, mechanical engineer, and electrical engineer. He was an important contributor to the birth of commercial electricity, and is best known for his many revolutionary developments in the field of electromagnetism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Tesla’s patents and theoretical work formed the basis of modern alternating current (AC) electric power systems, including the polyphase system of electrical distribution and the AC motor. This work helped usher in the Second Industrial Revolution.
Born an ethnic Serb in the village of Smiljan (now part of Gospić), in the Croatian Military Frontier of the Austrian Empire (modern-day Croatia), Tesla was a subject of the Austrian Empire by birth and later became an American citizen. Because of his 1894 demonstration of wireless communication through radio and as the eventual victor in the “War of Currents“, he was widely respected as one of the greatest electrical engineers who worked in America. He pioneered modern electrical engineering and many of his discoveries were of groundbreaking importance. In the United States during this time, Tesla’s fame rivaled that of any other inventor or scientist in history or popular culture. Tesla demonstrated wireless energy transfer to power electronic devices as early as 1893, and aspired to intercontinental wireless transmission of industrial power in his unfinished Wardenclyffe Tower Project.
Because of his eccentric personality and his seemingly unbelievable and sometimes bizarre claims about possible scientific and technological developments, Tesla was ultimately ostracized and regarded as a mad scientist by many late in his life. Tesla died with little money at the age of 86 in a hotel suite in New York City.”
Fragments of Olympian Gossip Lyrics by Nikola Tesla
(Verse)
While listening on my cosmic phone
I caught words from the Olympus blown.
A newcomer was shown around;
That much I could guess, aided by sound
"There's Archimedes with his lever.
Still busy on problems as ever
(Bridge)
Says, "matter and force are transmutable.
And wrong the laws you thought immutable."
(Verse 2)
Below, on Earth, they work at full blast.
And news are coming in thick and fast.
The latest tells of a cosmic gun.
To be pelted is very poor fun.
We are wary with so much at stake.
Those beggars are a pest—no mistake
Too bad, Sir Isaac, they dimmed your renown.
And turned your great science upside down.
Now a long haired crank, Einstein by name
Puts on your high teaching all the blame.
(Bridge)
Says, "matter and force are transmutable.
And wrong the laws you thought immutable."
(Verse 3)
I am much too ignorant, my son.
For grasping schemes so finely spun
My followers are of stronger mind.
And I am content to stay behind.
Perhaps I failed, but I did my best.
These masters of mine may do the rest.
Come, Kelvin, I have finished my cup.
When is your friend Tesla coming up."
"Oh, quoth Kelvin, he is always late.
It would be useless to remonstrate."
Then silence—shuffle of soft slippered feet—
I knock and—the bedlam of the street.
When Nikola Tesla, in this poem, talks about, “I'm much too ignorant for grasping this nonsense…”, he's basically saying intelligent people are the ones that are fools. You know, it is the very “brilliant highly intelligent” people who are the ones that fall for nonsense and poppycock. We actually see this in the world every branch of science. We always hear, “ He's got a super high IQ!”, but in reality, the super high IQ gambit is just another phrase for super brainwashed, and super indoctrinated. There is no confusing “intelligence” (i.e., epistemic empirical knowledge) and knowing a bunch of parroted stuff with the clear wisdom of Common Sense. Wisdom and intelligence are not the same thing, and the so-called “intelligence” that we actually ascribe to Sir Albert Einstein, is the biggest sham of all.
You should read Einstein’s “Travel Diaries”. The things that depraved Einstein wrote in his personal travel diary are the kinds of things that Kanye West says in his worst moments…and that’s pretty nasty stuff. Einstein was no great thinker, certainly not a scientist, and stole all his conceptual and mathematical ideas while working as patent clerk, and in particular, from genius mathematician, Jules Henri Poincaré.
And so, when Tesla says, “I’m much too ignorant for grasping this nonsense…”, he's basically saying, “I have wisdom, but I am not, thank God, “super-intelligent”, because super intelligent people will fall for this garbage of Quantum Physics and Einstein’s curved Space Time fantasy.
These “super intelligent” people believe that what's coming out of a magnet is virtual photons and virtual particles, which is absolutely an arbitrary abstraction with no basis in reality. No experiment has ever proven that. It’s just a fantasy. “Magnets are emitting virtual photons???” They might as well say that magnets are emitting microscopic unicorns or Leprechauns, which are causing the field around a magnet. That's nonsense too. Look up virtual particles or virtual photons.
Definition of Virtual Particles from Wikipedia:
“A virtual particle is a theoretical transient particle that exhibits some of the characteristics of an ordinary particle, while having its existence limited by The Uncertainty Principle. The concept of virtual particles arises in The Perturbation Theory of Quantum Field Theory where interactions between ordinary particles are described in terms of exchanges of virtual particles. A process involving virtual particles can be described by a schematic representation known as a Feynman diagram, in which virtual particles are represented by internal lines.”
This is not science. It is mathematical quackery, and mathematical quackery is best summed up by Tesla’s famous quote:
“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ”
--Nikola Tesla
The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply, and be quite insane. Most of modern scientists are very deep thinkers.
I would love to observe Miles Mathis' facial expressions while reads this for the first time...
GLOBE LOVER: 😂🤣