Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[joel321]

TA, I stumbled upon this today. Supposedly it's a simulation of a black hole with state of the art computing.

http://youtu.be/CbW2jKXq3gE

You can see some type of vertex going on there.

Here is the article.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/14/interstellar_black_holes_gravitational_lensing/

Just sharing man.

[joel321]



This is a right path to relate to others and the others to yourself. But I see things a bit different, ie for me there is not an outside or an inside, besides the ones defined and practiced by the human mind.

This is my personal opinion. We always learn from looking from the outside in. We understand colors from looking at them from the outside in. we understand how a rock looks like because we are looking at it from the outside in. But I understand that there is so much we can look in = macro world. The same applies by looking out. This is why we understand the universe (looking from in out) but we can only look so far because the light waves eventually dissipate like a candle light or a 200 lumen LED light can shine so far. This is why i don't believe in an edge to the universe nor believe in particles sort to speak. I just don't see all the laws being set in concrete. IMO.

As Ken loudly say every time, there is no particle anywhere. Just the human mind interpretation of some ether specific manifestations which give the characteristics that we call impulse, mass, moment, inertia and so on. Think again 99.999999999996 from the volume of the H atom is empty space according to current science, and only 4*10^-12 represent the volume of something that exhibit some specific characteristics on which we conclude and associate its behavior with a particle. But for someone who leaned on these issues over the years, is clear that this huge volume can not be empty in any way. Not at all! On the contrary, this volume is guilty of and define the characteristics of what of so called particle, nucleus or proton for H.

Or with your own words: "the water flushes down when ONLY water it's being replaced in the toilet bowl. BUT I have to think about the BOWL itself, not just the water." And finally we have to think about the observer. Who's the real observer?

Everything is spinning, from sub-quantum particles to clusters of galaxies, but we have to not forget this spinning movement is always correlated with a helical dynamics. They can't exists one without the other. Further jump from reference system to reference system and observe, interpret and conclude. If you have the ability to expand the horizons of conscience without loosing the finest details, will be amazed what you will find! Only from this point start the real knowledge and understanding! I don't want to only say great words, this is my own experience, which has no value if it is just exposed and not lived.

I will admit that I mostly speak in a way mostly kind of relating to philosophy so I'm not very familiar with all of this vortex and quantum stuff but I believe that everyone is capable of learning and surpassing the teacher...just my own personal beliefs. Having said that let me try to understand what you mean and give my own personal opinion.

"Empty space" is a tricky one. I would rather be is defined as LESS DENSE. I mean if my body is made up of atoms, I'm a human being. But when we start to look in to the atoms under a power microscope, there is a lot of space there. So I would assume a particle has density.... may not be 100% empty because the phenomena that gives it its existence has density. But then I have to think that when someone says that "particle" they mean "solid"....like a vapor is not solid compared to a liquid. Even thought a liquid has space in the quantum level (not solid) it has more density than a vapor by a long shot. So I have to take that in consideration qhen someone speak about a "particle", but like i said, I'm not even going to lie and say that I know something about this stuff. I'm only looking from the outside in along with logic/common sense/or what ever you want to call it.

It sounds like an interesting subject that I would not mind learning tho.

How much density does something quantum has to have to be considered a particle?

[TheoriaApophasis]

TA, I stumbled upon this today. Supposedly it's a simulation of a black hole with state of the art computing.

http://youtu.be/CbW2jKXq3gE

You can see some type of vertex going on there.

lovely video, .....however what is going on is NO DIFF than the Faraday effect on light.


There is no such autonomous entity as "Gravity" is merely dielectric counterspatial acceleration.



however as per the PHENOMENA itself, the same thing is going on with MATTER (stars, etc etc) as happens with LIGHT under the influence of of a mag field, except in reverse,  CENTRIPETAL , rather than CENTRIFUGAL as per the case with the Faraday effect.



the Cosmos is far far FAR FAR FAR more simplex than our idiot primitive science paints it as.

[joel321]

TA, wireless light transmitting "code", kind of reminds me of Nikola Teslas' magnetic propositions.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/15/a_little_light_music_200_gbps_plus_without_a_fibre/

using light instead of radio waves

I really want to see the how the light waves look compared to the radio waves in analog or digital?  Does not matter nor if random monkey figured this out in 200 years of typing random words in an old school typewriter...lol

[TheoriaApophasis]

TA, wireless light transmitting "code", kind of reminds me of Nikola Teslas' magnetic propositions.

The FUTURE is VORTEX ANTENNAS / receivers.





Vortex data transmission is going to make EVERYTHING TODAY soon look like the FUCKING PONY EXPRESS by comparison.