Why an ether/aether?

[altonhare]

I think so, where the two anti-parellel(still not sure about this terminology, shouldn't it be non-parallel, noting the difference between anti {against}, and non {not})ropes and all the atoms, which if there is nothingness then it would suggest a break in the ropes or I guess I'm trying to account for the "space" where there is complete "vaccum" within the confines of the rope theory.

so if the "interstellar" "space" between two objects on distant sides of the universe is connected the only difference is the definition of individual units that comprise the two ropes v. a single aether unit all of which are connected to everything else

maybe its the perception two different ways of understanding the same phenomenom

or not

Unfortunately with regards to APM I have not seen a single picture explicitly depicting the interconnection of atoms or showing how they are connected. I have seen some pictures but it is not clear to me how the causal interrelation between the objects illustrated with these pictures produces the observations of light and gravity.

Additionally all the published definitions with regards to fundamental terms such as dimension, space, and length are circular or simply avoid saying anything:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... iew#p12402

There is no such "thing" as space. Also, "perfect vacuum" is impossible in a convergent universe so we do not need to "account" for it:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... uum#p12635

Since space is not a "thing" it cannot "be connected".

[flyingcloud]

so the way I see it the apm doesn't say space is empty either, connection or not there is something there and everything touches everything else.

tjhe differnece I perceive is that a rope is linear whereas apm is 3 dimensional in the same context, the ropes can be bent, contorted to acheive three dimensional attributes but the connectivity between two adjacent points on that rope a restricted to two dimensional linear continuity

as opposed to apm which should connect to the next adjacent unit in all directions simultaneously

[kevin]

flyingcloud,
Instead of nothing, think no-thing.
Nothing is how they have described space, and they further describe it as a vacuum, stating that such a thing is roughly nothing, instead think no-thing.
I assure You that circulating about this planet are flows of no-thing, and that any created vacuum will be permeated totally by no-thing.
Current science cannot recognise no-thing, it demands there be something or nothing.
The flows of no-thing are at ninty degrees to the surface all around the sphere, if You look at clouds somedays you can see flat bases to them that are all in the same plane above the surface, I consider these will be bounderies of where opposite direction flows of no-thing exist.
No-thing is constantly acting under attraction to its opposite, and remember that about the sphere these two opposites circulate at ninty degrees to the surface , but in space they are travelling in a circuler direction around the sun relative to the surface, thus at roughly 180 degrees to the circulating flows around the planets.
As the diameters of the circulations increase away from the surface so the angles between the circulating travelling no-things will alter, this is where light and all the resultant creation from this is released in my opinion.
To the observer looking from wherever the observer is, it will APPEAR as though light is streaming in a linear fashion, it is not , it is where the flows of no-thing meet at specific angles near 180 degrees that light occurs.

The big thing called the sun causes an illusion that light comes from it, it doesn't, but the circulations of no-thing does as the sun is sited central with circulations of no-thing circulaing itself, therefore it is seen as been a huge fireball, when it will be no such thing.
The planets are circulating as such in the circulations around the sun, each planet has it's own circulations, where they meet because of the spiral nature of each, light is released, but only at specific angles that don't exist as you go outward in diameter around each planet.
Thus space appears as nothing, but is in fact everything but not interfered with as such .
Kevin

[altonhare]

so the way I see it the apm doesn't say space is empty either, connection or not there is something there and everything touches everything else.

tjhe differnece I perceive is that a rope is linear whereas apm is 3 dimensional in the same context, the ropes can be bent, contorted to acheive three dimensional attributes but the connectivity between two adjacent points on that rope a restricted to two dimensional linear continuity

as opposed to apm which should connect to the next adjacent unit in all directions simultaneously

Space is not an entity which can be empty or full!

Every "thing" cannot touch every other "thing" in thread theory because every single atom is not simultaneously touching every other atom. Only so many atoms can fit around one atom . Touch is "0 distance" between two objects or entities.

In chain theory it is even more explicit. Each link of chain is connected to two others, but only touches other links occasionally through normal motion.

Each atom connects to each other atom in every direction, what is this talk of 2D? Curvilinear motion, i.e. motion with nonuniform acceleration in a direction, is not an issue at all. Also, the rope is *always* 3D, it never "achieves 3D attributes". It is always 3 dimensional.

Instead of nothing, think no-thing.
Nothing is how they have described space, and they further describe it as a vacuum, stating that such a thing is roughly nothing, instead think no-thing.

Can you provide an actual picture and/or definition of no-thing, to illustrate explicitly how it is different from nothing? You seem to think it can "flow" and perform other actions. Objects and entities can perform actions, concepts cannot. Is no-thing an object/entity then? If so, what does it look like? If not, how is it different from an object/entity such that it remains physical (shape, finite) and can perform actions (but still not be something)?

I think I know what you're thinking now Kevin. By "no-thing" you're referring to what I refer to simply by saying "nothing". On the other hand most mainstream physicists say nothing/vacuum incongruously to refer to a "sea of virtual particles blinking in and out of existence". It is their blithe disregard for even the most basic rudiments of logic and language that leads to so much confusion.

So when I say "nothing" I am NOT referring to the web of chain-rope interconnecting atoms (which is something, although you cannot reach out and grab it in the usual sense of the phrase). An atom propagates along this web by collecting chain in its direction of travel and releasing chain in the opposite direction. This web makes its presence known to us by the alternating expansion/contraction of the electron shells of atoms, which torques each rope-chain in the web, and is known as light. Another atom's shell is expanded/contracted by the local torsion-state of the rope-chain.

So, although the interconnected "highway" on which the signal known as light propagates is something, it does not prohibit the motion of entities like atoms because these entities are also constituted of pieces of the highway. I think you, Kevin, are referring to this "highway" as nothing because the mainstream mathematical physicists erroneously and incongruously do so (albeit in the context of their own irrational and supernatural theories).

[kevin]

Altonhare,
I can only describe what I can detect at the scale I am capable of detecting at.
But I visualise all-things as been to scale similer , if not replica's.

The picture in the APM of the aether, is a simplified representation of that dual spin something.
Throughout history twin serpents have been utilised to try and convey this duality, imo.


I can only presume that this duality is simple and is the one thing either attracted or repelled from its self same self.
Once they coalesce and begin to compound they release light and form the elements dependent upon the geometry they are in.
the only difference in anything can only be the geometry involved, and that geometry will vary by way of interferance.

The framework of neutral pathways are definately there, and must be different in that they seem immune to all interferance, maybe some sort of single sex neutral?
The aether flows react and interact in a symbiotic fashion, both to the geometry and the interferance created and to the existing created also enticing the flows to further replicate in that fashion.
This is very evident along the chalk bands, and IMO is the reason that bands of similer elements are found to aggregate in formations and along alignments, the geometry is there, plus what that geometry creates further assists in the buildup of same.
This ability of existing formed elements to entice the aether in a specific pathway is the basics of megalithic sites, imo.
The unseen to our dominant senses symbiotic relationship between existing created and the flowing aether is why they are, and why they are positioned where they are, and why such specific certain elements are utilised in such precise position, it is the inbuilt geometry encoded within the crystalline structure that then can entice the aether flows to accumulate and travel where so desired.

I consider this knowledge was widespread at a distant time, that a complete understanding of all of this existed, and that this understanding included what creation is, and what dissolvement back is.
that nobody dies, we are electric beings in an electric universe, we are the aether, the aether is ourselves, both the biological, and the non physical aspect of ourselves, and that this non physical is part of other dimensions that come into and out of 3D, mostly to observe and report back as such.
Thank goodness this is the mad ideas section, but I don't think it's mad?
Kevin

[junglelord]

Space is not an entity which can be empty or full!

Space, entity, not empty or full, well thats a dog chasing its tail. Where do you come up with this stuff anyway?

On the contrary space (as in outer) can only be filled with the attributes of space which by definition in the EU include charge, permittivity, permeablity, capacitance, inductance, conductance, all distributed and all related to the spherical constant.

Your fancy smancy definitions are a language all unto yourself and serve only you as both every answer to every thing and a correction for everthing.

Alton your a nice guy, but really square.

[lizzie]

Junglelord said: Alton your a nice guy, but really square.

Think of the bright side, Alton. The square and the circle are the two basic sacred geometrical forms from which all others issue. Without the square or the circle we would be nothing. Aether plus sacred geometry equals matter. So the aether matters.

[altonhare]

Space is not an entity which can be empty or full!

Space, entity, not empty or full, well thats a dog chasing its tail. Where do you come up with this stuff anyway?

On the contrary space (as in outer) can only be filled with the attributes of space which by definition in the EU include charge, permittivity, permeablity, capacitance, inductance, conductance, all distributed and all related to the spherical constant.

Your fancy smancy definitions are a language all unto yourself and serve only you as both every answer to every thing and a correction for everthing.

Alton your a nice guy, but really square.

You rail against me for my efforts to develop a sturdy foundation of definitions, but have no problem doing it yourself in the context of your own theory:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... ons#p13187

I guess it's only okay when you do it?

[altonhare]

http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/

The guy in the rain is my great great great.... grandfather?

[bboyer]

http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/

The guy in the rain is my great great great.... grandfather?

Priceless.

[Solar]

Chip of the 'ol block eh?

[junglelord]

It is ok alton, as APM is fully quantified, fully re-defined, easy to learn and teach, only you seem to have a mental block.
Your rope theory is a game of semantics and arm chair philosophy. (you do a great job of keeping it that way too)

You cannot produce a single equation, and claim you need none. You do not have a book, nor Q&A. You have not re-defined physics, nor have you have produced a UFT or produced the electron binding equation, proper charge quantification, explained the fine structure constant, or any other Nobel Prize worthy revelation...

In short you found a video on you tube, and in no way are you affiliated with the author....who by the way rants better then he teaches.

[lizzie]

Are “ropes and chains” the same as “musical chords of influence” operating through a vibrating resonant cavity filled with aether?

FASTER THAN A SPEEDING LIGHT
http://home.gwi.net/~erichard/fastlit.htm

The characteristics of an all embracing aether provided the framework for See's calculation of the 'Wave Theory of Gravity'. By building on Newton's image of the aether as a "Vibrating medium that diffused over the universe and penetrated all matter", he was able to calculate many physical constants, such as its energy, stress, rigidity, and pressure. See's elastic pressure of aether envisioned a universe filled with invisible Fourier waves of all possible lengths and traveling in every direction under balanced symmetry of stress about a vibrating body, such as a planet.

Each cosmic body---a planet, a moon, or a star---utilizes the spherical shape as its energy containment. The sphere is an ideal shape for a resonant cavity. The very nature of the sphere means that it resonates over vast spectrums of frequency. For example, if we start by considering the earth circumference of approximately 7.5 Hz, as a fundamental, we may calculate and detect many higher harmonically-related frequencies. In addition, there are radius frequencies with higher harmonics present. Harmonic waves in a spherical solid set up a periodic distribution within the inner and outer spherical cavities. The Van Allen energy belts surrounding the earth also present a multitude of resonant harmonics at lower frequencies than the circumference 7.5 Hz.

The numerous energy belts about the earth act as spherical capacitors, one within another. These energy field capacitors create highly fluctuating potential gradients, vertically arrayed at right angles to the earth surface. These large spherical capacitors longitudinally couple a continuous supply of vibrations from the outer magnetosphere to the earth surface and within the earth. The many surrounding energy belts act as sensitive detecting membranes to couple the solar system and galactic information vibrations to the inner earth fields which we inhabit.

It should not take a great stretch of your imagination to see how our solar system's ever-changing longitudinal chords of influence resonate and interact by coupling all bodies of the system to all other bodies, instantaneously!

The Universe must communicate with itself in real-time, nearly instantaneously, through out all levels, from the micro-subatomic to the macro-intergalactic

P.S. If you don't subscribe to his "ropes and chain" theory, then it's "whips and chains" for you.

[kevin]

Lizzie,
I love Dr See, you see its what I see , out there is a sea, and because we see via this sea, it gives the illusion of circulating bodies, but it's the spiral way we see.
Figure(2) your link.
kevin

[lizzie]

Kevin said: Lizzie, I love Dr See, you see its what I see , out there is a sea, and because we see via this sea, it gives the illusion of circulating bodies, but it's the spiral way we see.

I can see that you see just as Dr. See sees. Dr. See sees seas of see-thing spiraling energy, just as you say you see those same seas of see-thing spiraling energy. Perhaps one day we will all see the same seas of see-thing spiraling energy that Dr. See sees and you say you see; so in the fore-seeable future we will no longer suffer the illusion of seeing them as see-thing circular bodies and instead see them as the same sea of see-thing spiraling energy that you say you see and Dr See sees. In the meantime, C ya, See Sea Rider!