It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Gumerk
Enjoyed reading this and watching the video. Can you give us some kind of link that can verify CERN cranking up to full power in Dec. 2012? If accurate, that is something I wasn't aware of at all. Also, what are your thoughts on Edgar Cayce and his readings? Thanks
CERN gets its energy largely from fossil fuels, maybe a little hydroelectric, both of which have as their source matter being converted into energy in the sun during the nuclear fusion process. Some portion comes from nuclear fission. (In both cases mass is converted to energy following the E=mc^2 formula).
Originally posted by consciousgod
So where is the extra energy at CERN coming from?
Is CERN breaking the most fundamental law of physics or is there something else going on?
Why is it that you say it is pseudo-science?
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
CERN gets its energy largely from fossil fuels, maybe a little hydroelectric, both of which have as their source matter being converted into energy in the sun during the nuclear fusion process. Some portion comes from nuclear fission. (In both cases mass is converted to energy following the E=mc^2 formula).
Originally posted by consciousgod
So where is the extra energy at CERN coming from?
Is CERN breaking the most fundamental law of physics or is there something else going on?
Why is it that you say it is pseudo-science?
You've provided no sources for any of this and I wouldn't even call it pseudoscience, which would be elevating it to a status far higher than what it deserves. I'd say it looks like a bunch of made up mumbo-jumbo which doesn't even try to be scientific. At least pseudoscience tries to appear as though it may be scientific (hence the name) but your post doesn't even seem to make the attempt.
If I'm wrong however, and you do have scientific sources, please post them.
Now secondly, Wilcock cites a little known book called With Mystics and Magicians in Tibet by Alexandra David-Neel.
in this it is explained how the tibetans accomplished "acoustic levitation". A scene is described of cliffs, of which tibetan monks were building a stone wall at the top, from the ground at the bottom. I'm not going to detail everything that is in the book, but the short of it is this: a large group of 13 drumming monks, 6 trumpeting monks, and 200 mindfully meditating monks were able to lift stones (1 meter by 1 meter in diameter) slowly up to the top of the cliff in a lumbering 500-meter arc.
they modified the diameter of their drums and trumpets in order to make an exact mathematical correspondence to the size of the stone that they wished to move. As a group, they then formed a sort of 90 degree semicircle and oriented the focal point of this "arc" of tibetans toward the stone in question. Wilcock goes on to explain (scientifically) how this was possible.
The power of the drums, trumpets, and chanting made a perfect vibrational resonance that literally resonated every atom of the stone. They effectively resonated the atoms of the rock over the light speed boundary, making them weightless. This also forced the accelerated atoms out of space-time and into time-space, and used levity to fight gravity. As many as half of the atoms were no longer in reality, making the stone soft and malleable, like clay.
Dewey B. Larson (1898 - 1990) was an American engineer and author, who was born in North Dakota and grew up in the Western United States. He developed the Reciprocal System of Physical Theory, or RST, a comprehensive, general, system of physical theory published in a three volume set entitled The Structure of the Physical Universe.
Did you read the article? It said nothing about anything leaving our universe. When David Copperfield made a plane disappear, the plane didn't really go anywhere, it was an illusion. That's all the researchers did is made an illusion with a well known property of bending light in materials other than a vacuum, like glass.
Originally posted by consciousgod
Time cloaking a particle like in below link is evidence that the particle is not in our universe.
abcnews.go.com...
No I'm saying you didn't cite any article from CERN backing up the wild claims you're making. where do they attribute anything to a 5th dimension?
The extra energy spike on CERN instruments is probably energy leaking from the 5th dimension. CERN did the test for me and provided the results. I feel CERN needs a bigger hole and a bigger bang before they will see the light.
Are you saying CERN is not scientific enough for you to consider valid science?
More making up BS, as the article says nothing about a 5th dimension.
Here is more evidence of leakage from the 5th dimension. On the quantum level, space-time is grainy as evidenced by this article:
www.khouse.org...
The graininess of space-time may be caused by a constant leakage of energy from quantum space between quarks that manifest as expanding space.
Again made up. Source for this 5th dimension claim?
This may also be the source of what is called the cosmic background radiation.
The cosmic background radiation may not only be residual radiation left over from the big bang; but a by-product of leakage of expanding space from the 5th dimension.
Who says they go anywhere? They self annihilate, says the theory.
Like this next article states, it is well known that quantum particles pop in and out of existence.
www.scientificamerican.com...
It is easy to understand the "in existence" part, but the "out of existence" part should be puzzling to most people. HENCE, where does it go when it is out of existence?
Solution: The particles travel to the 5th dimension where they do not experience time.
Where does it say anything about a 5th dimension? It doesn't.
There are many experiments that are evidence of this. The double slit experiment is the big one.
www.youtube.com...
The latest test result at CERN with the neutrinos that arrived sooner than expected indicating they traveled faster than light is also evidence that the 5th dimension exists.
www.guardian.co.uk...
More evidence? You haven't provided a shred of evidence yet for the 5th dimension, on the contrary, the absence of anything about a 5th dimension from every single source you cited verifies you're making this up.
Would you like more evidence?
Originally posted by inivux
All I see is a bunch of pseudo-scientific, metaphysical ramblings (complete with contrived buzz words), and absolutely zero mathematical proofs.
Are you able to scientifically prove the existence of these concepts you describe?edit on 12-1-2012 by inivux because: (no reason given)
Did you read the article? It said nothing about anything leaving our universe. When David Copperfield made a plane disappear, the plane didn't really go anywhere, it was an illusion. That's all the researchers did is made an illusion with a well known property of bending light in materials other than a vacuum, like glass.
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Who says they go anywhere? They self annihilate, says the theory.
I'm saying you didn't cite any article from CERN backing up the wild claims you're making. where do they attribute anything to a 5th dimension?