Thunder Energies Corp Discovers Invisible Terrestrial Entities

The "enitities" supposedly on the video...aren't those just normal bulb techniques in photography? My cousin's been doing that on his Pentax since we were young.

This is clear bunk and can be proven as such from two different perspectives, one though how optics work, and one through physics.

First, optics. Some telescopes do use a concave lens in their design, but never only concave lenses. Multiple concave lenses distort light and will prevent light from being able to focus, meaning you won't see anything but distorted blobs, exactly like Santilli is showing in his video. Those telescopes that do use a concave lens use them alongside convex lenses to properly focus light.

Two examples of telescopes that use concave lenses are achromatic telescopes and cassegrain telescopes.

You can also find concave lenses in barlow lenses that will double the magnification of any eyepiece you attach to them. Keep in mind all these designs also incorporate convex lenses and won't work without them.

Optical engineering is an entire field of study that covers everything from lenses for glasses, to microscopes, telescopes, lasers, fiber-optics, and optical disc systems like CD's and DVD's. If putting a bunch of concave lenses together could reveal invisible beings, you would think someone would have tried it or thought of it already. It would mean a conspiracy amongst hundreds of thousands of optical engineers across multiple industries being silenced for hundreds of years, even involving early astronomers like Galileo and Copernicus who built their own telescopes and experimented with different lens combinations.

Secondly, this is clearly bunk according to Physics. Antimatter are particles that have the same mass as ordinary particles, but have an opposite electric charge. Photons are massless and have no electric charge. As such, photons don't have an anti-particle because it's impossible to have a counterpart with an opposing electric charge if you have none.

Since there is no such thing as an antiphoton it's not possible for antiphotons to refract differently through optics. As such, the blobs you are seeing in Santilli's telescope are just distorted light sources that can't be focused properly due to it's abhorrent optical design using only concave lenses.

I wouldn't buy any stock in his company.

Additionally, what is up with all of the double telescope mounts?
Looks like BS in stereo.
To use them like that you would need CCD imagers in each eyepiece holder and software to view it in stereo...
Useless with the mounts they show, they would vibrate and shake like crazy, not to mention that they do not look like equatorial mounts, so how are you going to track objects and clock their movement?

The other problem I have is the legacy focal length. Any useful scope today is a Schmidt-Cassegrain, or other type of catadioptric design. Why would they put this "convex" lens in a non-modern, basic design that takes up so much space, and is heaver than it needs to be?

Wrong on so many levels.

Concave lenses don't magnify images, they focus them to the center giving the blobby, centered images we see. Other pics look like shaky cam time exposures, with a little bit of narrative thrown in.

"I used to be a faculty at prestigious schools".

No accredited or peer reviewed links because real science doesn't review crap like this. Nothing new about looking through concave lenses, either. Theres no point to it, really.

Next he'll claim he sees spirits by looking backwards through binoculars.

Edit: I'm working on a kaleidoscope that will see spirits…

originally posted by: intrptr
Next he'll claim he sees spirits by looking backwards through binoculars.

When I imbibe in too many spirits, my vision makes it seem as if I'm looking backwards through binoculars.

Is that what you mean?

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: intrptr
Next he'll claim he sees spirits by looking backwards through binoculars.

When I imbibe in too many spirits, my vision makes it seem as if I'm looking backwards through binoculars.

Is that what you mean?

I think thats tunnel vision of the "sprits" kind, the kind just before you pass out.

Most people see double… or get the 'spins'. Billy Bob looks through the bottom of empty bottles, lol

Have to look more into this person and his company.

I wish they would post more results though.

Duh... I and many others have been seeing these shadow people from of our peripheral for years now. I'm finally elated that some so called "official" is confirming their existence.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Bedlam
Yah, that's the turbo encabulator part.

But that has the reciprocating dingle arm to ensure proper sinusoidal repleneration which the telescope lacks so how can the telescope work on anti-matter without that? Maybe if they hooked the turbo encabulator up to the telescope? I recommend this model from General Electric, a name you can trust more than Thunder Energies:

en.wikipedia.org...:GE_Turboencabulator_pg_1.jpg

That Turboencabulator was known for having defective canooter valves. Probably why it never really found success.

Ill just Place this here ... Meanwhile in the outer deep space craziness ....

That bizarre-looking star just got a lot weirder — and yes, it could be aliens
www.businessinsider.com...

Comets can’t explain weird ‘alien megastructure’ star after all
www.newscientist.com... =hoot&cmpid=SOC|NSNS|2016-GLOBAL-hoot

Astronomers have spotted something in space that looks like it could have been made by aliens
www.businessinsider.com...

KIC 8462852 Faded at an Average Rate of 0.165+-0.013 Magnitudes Per Century From 1890 To 1989
Bradley E. Schaefer
(Submitted on 13 Jan 2016)
arxiv.org...


We spoke with some of the astronomers who discovered the 'alien' megastructure to find out if it's fact or fiction
www.businessinsider.com...

In a Galaxy.... I mean Star.. far far Away 1,500 light years...

then the Star Wars Theme comes up !!

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
The home of "Thunder Energies" -

Neighborhood context: a trailer park across the roadway -

It's a tin shack owned by a guy pumping up his penny stocks. Don't believe anything you read on those "pay-to-publish" outlets.

For starters, I kind of like those odd occasions when I go for a hoax, hook, line and sinker, suggests that their might just be a wee scrap of innocence left in the deep, dark recesses. Until your post though, I had assumed it was a scam of some variety, but now, looking at that "rustic" set up, I am wondering now if this is not some Tesla-like backwater genius desperately trying to get recognition for his wonderfully mad invention, rather than what I had thought originally, some white collar twat looking to squeeze the life out of the planet for profit.

Intriguing how the prejudical faculties of the mind work, both for and against.

Cheers.

Ok I have come to a conclusion that this is fringe science at best. Santilli uses his own isodual mathematics to explain antimatter and antiparticles which is obivously quite different to conventional physics. And since my knowledge about physics is limited...I really can`t argue much.

So even if the images from the telescope recordings are genuine, it is all a matter of interpretation about what we are looking at. I mean even if we are to replicate "the evidence" it all goes down to yours vs. mine side of the coin.

Prof. R. M. Santilli’s Curriculum Vitae:

www.world-lecture-series.org...

This is a man that is long-established and has a legacy to protect.
It is beyond reasonable dispute that he is a well-respected scientist.

This is his page regarding his Nobel Prize nomination:
www.santilli-foundation.org...

I've been reading articles on this site almost daily for many years now. There is a phenomenon I have observed, both here and on YouTube, in the comments section when a post is made that has more legitimacy than most on some subjects (such as extraterrestrials, or Sasquatch). Suddenly a host of skeptics appear that either derail debate (on YouTube it's the God-crazy posters), ridicule the topic or the post, ridicule those that take it seriously in the comments, or give a sudden "debunked - case closed" argument which might satisfy most casual readers.

So predictable this phenomenon is, that I can only attribute it to a conspiracy of disinformation spread through agents holding accounts on many popular sites. Additionally, there is a vocal minority of ignorance and/or idiocy which tends to comment, so there's that. And of course, legitimate individuals of just a differing opinion, but those are fairly easy to spot - they are not so argumentative, emotional, or trying to 'push the point' of their argument to the audience.

It bothers me when a scientist of this caliber publishes a paper with the evidence of his claim, and suddenly a dozen people make a post that literally or effective says, "I call bulls##t," or "I smell a hoax." This type of quick negative reaction from such a large segment of commenters is soft-evidence for me, that Santilli's research in this area poses an implicit threat of truth and exposure that some want to see ended.

a reply to: mjharwood

Well respected scientists dont "publish" junk science in fake journals to fool the layperson into believing its credible research.

a reply to: mjharwood

It matters not even if it was Steven hawking.

There will always be opposition to anything "non sanctioned"

By folks that say they know better.

And there are a lot of those folks around these parts....

I'm not one to discount it so easy, there IS more here than science has proven.. penicillin was "stumbled" across too.. hell.. most of the things we now take for granted were happy accidents that were shot down at first... this one remembers that fact when approaching the fringe...

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: mjharwood

Well respected scientists dont "publish" junk science in fake journals to fool the layperson into believing its credible research.

Thank you good sir, for illustrating my point moments after my post.

a reply to: mjharwood

So publishing in a fake predatory journal doesn't raise red flags for you? Intentionally trying to deceive the scientifically illiterate doesn't strike you as dishonest?

This is not how "well respected scientists" operate. But I guess such dishonest tactics work as you fell for it hook, line and sinker.

Hmmmm. There's been discussions about possible life forms living in the atmosphere. Plasma UFOs, or even creatures from an "overlap" dimension. I see articles like this occasionally and get all optimistic about a new discovery. Heyho, I never learn. I would love this to be something...but I think I'll pass. A fun read though, so thanks for posting.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Chickensalad

There have been stories of "critters" for years, with one dude taking pictures that look like shiny, metallic, black blobs.

It would seem reasaonable that, given the efficient way of nature, something could be there to feed on various energy. Our atmosphere is alive with energy.

But something that extraordinary would require something more than some dude in a nice suit, sitting in front of cheap furniture, to convince me.

True.

I guess though with the countless stories across the world of there being other types of beings, such as let's say "spiritual" ones or what have you, it's possible there is a different form of existence or non-corporal beings.

I'm not saying it is true, but with a lot of "spiritual" things people need to reframe it.

LIke in this example, perhaps there ARE intelligences that are more of an energetic form than the normal physical form we know of. It doesn't have to be magical.

Similarly, a lot of people shrilly claim that a collective unconscious or even "mind reading" could never happen, but with thoughts and mind consisting partly of electrical brain waves, it is entirely possible that it could be transmitted or picked up by someone else.

Auras. People mocked this forever. But now science knows that people do emit an electro-magnetic field around them. Whether or not this is influenced by who the person is and whether some people can see these fields are different questions.

The point being, a lot of self-described "scientific" people dismiss some of these things as magical, when in reality if one reframes them it's not as out there as people make it out to be. My points don't make them all true, however.

a reply to: mjharwood

He is not well-respected. He is regarded as a junk scientist. He walked away from real science long ago.

He has several official-sounding web sites to promote himself.

"www.scientificethics.org" - the claim he has a Nobel prize nomination came from himself, via his own web site.

Registrant Contact Information:
Name: Luca Petronio
City: Palm Harbor
State: Florida
Zip: 34684
Country: US

"Luca Petronio," aka RM Santilli. Much like "JV Kadeisvili," another nom de plume for Santilli.

"www.world-lecture-series.org"

Admin Name: Ruggero Santilli
Admin Organization: Thunder Energies Corporation


Finding JV Kadeisvili – or Mailing with Ruggero M Santilli

Ruggero Santilli is a fascinating person. Once a scientist with an apparent normal career, now a fringe scientist running his own ‘scientific’ institute, publisher of two journals and founder of a dubious company which sells gas for welding purposes. He seems to have completely turned his backed on regular science, but at the same time wants to hold up the appearance of a serious scientist and tries to get some of his articles published in regular journals.
When one of those was debunked, he asked one of the scientists of his Institute for Basic Research, Jerdsey Vladimir Kadeisvili, to write a defense. This was published as well.

Kadeisvili, however, is just an alias of Santilli, as will get clear when you read on. But I must warn you: according to Kadeisvili/Santilli I’m ‘a threat to America and mankind.’

Apparently Santilli likes to invent sock puppets to defend himself with. I could create a nom de plume, put up a Web site, call it "official-something-or-other.org" then claim to nominate myself for a Nobel prize too. Won't mean jack spit in the real world, but it sure fools the fools.