So is Stephen Hawkins wrong or is Einstein wrong?

[Cryptoscientia]

"Now, why is this important to the development of overunity? The concept of overunity touches on the existence of a potential infinite "sea of energy" in the vacuum, and so we need a mathematics that has infinity as a central part of it. So long as 0 is the center, we cannot develop mathematics to describe the infinite sea of energy, and thus we cannot develop and understand true overunity."(LariAnn)

I think that we do need to change our current math system. There are so many different math calculations that were made up over hundreds of years and lots of difficult math errors or 'unknowns'. So I agree.

Here is an overview of what I proposed so far...

Ether
Ether is quantum fluctuations or Zero Point Energy.

Ether is infinitely small and fills all parts of the universe.

Well, think of ether as a cloth that goes out in every direction infinitely. If you pull on any one spot all the cloth moves. (All ether is connected)

In any one time there cannot be zero energy or matter or ether in any space (it must something of the three things above).

Ether may be independent of Matter or Energy.


Matter
All matter or anti matter is a manifestation of an Ether bubble in a stable form.

There are the four basic stable Ether matter types: Protons and Electrons and Positron and Anti-protons (stable ‘bubbles’ of ether).

All other particles (known as of now...) are mostly unstable and breakdown to Ether in a matter of seconds (sometimes minuets).

The unstable particles can form the stable particles.

All particles have wavelengths and wave properties.

Matter or energy effects ether by contracting or expanding the ether present.

Matter may be independent of Energy or Ether.


Energy
Energy is the connection or force that stable ether particles have with the ether they are formed from. This force may be independent of Matter or Ether. (kinetic, potential, thermal, electromagnetic or photons, chemical, nuclear, and mass…. All are connected with the ether and the matter they interact with)


Opposites (time, ether, particles)

There is anti-time, anti-ether and anti-particles (reverse quantum fluctuation) and time, ether and particles (quantum fluctuation).



Dimensions

Also in the dimensions, the ether is layered -+-+-+- so on and so forth, each just a fraction "out of phase" with ours.

There are other (infinite) dimensions vibrating at each there own frequency and there are infinite frequencies thus there are infinite dimensions.

[QuantumArtist]

LariAnn, you're saying almost exactly what I say about polarity! You might like the theory I posted in this thread;

http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=604

While I do not talk about dimensions and the zero point on them, its still something I think you could appreciate given your take on the 0 value. The main difference in your postulation over the one I linked is that yours concerns matter, mine mostly focuses upon mapping energy and proposing the possibility of a 3rd "neutral" energy (which I think is more accurately described as a verb or action).

I think the known dimensions of matter are pretty much an illusion given my pixel/matter theory. Basically that hight, length and width of any item are actually made of up many points of matter, much like any image on a computer screen is made of many pixels. Each individual point of matter has no dimension, they are merely points where action happens, but collectively build up to provide dimension of objects, just like pixels on your computer are merely points but collectively build images on your screen. Over "frames" (again, just like your computer screen) these points change to give the illusion of the 4th dimension, time.

Essentially, I'm saying these dimensions are actually illusions at the most basic levels of energy and matter. They only exist when more then 1 point of matter or 1 frame of time are considered.
_________________
QuantumArtist. Proud high school graduate. Part Science, part artist, all bullsh*t

I'm not going to think you're right till you give me good reason to change my mind!
(Your education is not a good reason)

[QuantumArtist]

[quote="Cryptoscientia"]Ether is infinitely small and fills all parts of the universe.[/quote]

Just a minor point of clarification if I may. Ether (or what I call action) is not small... it has no size at all! It is merely action, like a verb in a sentence. Verbs don't have size.
_________________
QuantumArtist. Proud high school graduate. Part Science, part artist, all bullsh*t

I'm not going to think you're right till you give me good reason to change my mind!
(Your education is not a good reason)

[LariAnn]

QuantumArtist,

I took the time to read your theory and I must say that you do indeed have "half the concept". I respectfully ask you to reciprocate and read some of the extensive substance of my current understanding because I'm confident you will find that we are actually both on the same page, but in different paragraphs! I must refer you to my link, though because to post all my writings here would be too much (and redundant as well, seeing as it is available on my site).

I will tell you that I understand what the neutral energy is and that your observations of it are on track. However, I don't expect anyone in a physics lab to make measurements of it, even though we all are influenced by it every day. I call this energy "Equanimic" and it is the result of what I call the catiteration of all other energies. "Catiteration" means the removal or reversal of dimensional iteration, or distinctions that separate one kind of energy from another. For example, if you catiterate what you call positive energy and negative energy (assuming these were the only two kinds of iterated energetic), the result would be Equanimic, or the neutral energy, just as you have illustrated with your equations. I don't call it neutral energy because it is actually an energetic of infinite potential that, when iterated, forms all the kinds of energy in existence.

I do not feel that we can ever design a physical device to tap Equanimic itself, but we can do so to tap the vast sea of energy that funds the physical universe. And be sure, all iterated existence must be funded continually or it will revert back to Equanimic.

The fun part is that the idea of "positive" and "negative" energies is an artifact of our polaric perception, and not reflective of the way things really are. Positive and negative are not opposites except in the context of polarity, but separations/distinctions such as these (or as in "dimensions") are illusory, as you have also ointed out. Since we need some way to distinguish what we observe, we attach labels and make dimensions to describe the observations.

True dimensions are what I call "fractions of infinity"; examples are a line of infinite length or a plane of infinite area. All true dimensions have a value of infinity, but they are defined as uniquely limited parameters, as opposed to unbounded Infinity, which is of infinite Dimension, yet dimensionless. Dimensions always limit Infinity in some way. in one dimension, for example, you can travel infinitely along the infinite line, but you can only travel on the line, so you are limited.

There are two ways to reach Infinity; the additive (aniteration) and the subtractive (catiteration). Most of what is done in technology is aniterative, with the belief that the solution to all problems is more iteration (more complexity). By contrast, the way of the mystic is catiteration, or the enlightened realization that All is One. Think about it.

Once you have any quantity "more" then One, you have fractions, not greater quantities. The example I give is that, in the universe of apples, is 11 apples "more" than the universe? No, any quantity less than the whole universe is a fraction of that universe. 12 apples is "more" than 11 apples (a relative comparison), but both are fractions of the universe of apples. The universe of apples is symbolic of Infinity, and 11 or 12 apples are symbolic of "whole numbers". Therefore, there are no "whole" numbers, only fractions. That is one reason I call the physical universe the "panfractalic" because it is defined by fractional dimensions, not whole dimensions. A line 12 inches long is an infinitesimal fraction of the infinite line, a whole dimension, which in turn is a fraction of Infinity.

So you can only have "more" and "less" when you compare one fraction with another fraction. Any fraction compared to Infinity is infinitesimal, which means it is too small to be measured, while not 0. 0, or nothingness, is a relative concept only, as in "I had three apples, but now I have 0".

I could go on with this, but I welcome discourse and dialogue because it is within the scope of this understanding that I feel the keys to overunity lie.

LariAnn
http://fractalicawakening.com[/url]

[QuantumArtist]

Actually, my equations were merely to show a relationship in polar forces that has been completely overlooked due to a lack of understanding the potential for a force existing in 0 polarity.

Whether this force exists in our concept of electricity, or at a more basic level (which I believe) is really a mute point. When speaking strictly about action, its really hard to measure. I merely cut away anything matter related and deal with the numbers themselves. Its our dependence upon matter that has kept us from being able to look at the numbers themselves what they have to tell us.

When I say 1 or -1 in my theory, I talk about a theoretical, indivisible unit of action. If you could pour a single unit of intangeable action into a cup, thats what 1 or -1 would be. On those terms, you have to look at the numbers and from there I you can see the value of 0, as I show you in my link.

Its a big thing too! If I'm right, I may have very simply shown you the real power behind gravity. According to the numerical relationships I explain in my post, the ±1 energy acts just like it!
_________________
QuantumArtist. Proud high school graduate. Part Science, part artist, all bullsh*t

I'm not going to think you're right till you give me good reason to change my mind!
(Your education is not a good reason)

[Cryptoscientia]

Hello everyone,

“The main difference in your postulation over the one I linked is that yours concerns matter, mine mostly focuses upon mapping energy and proposing the possibility of a 3rd "neutral" energy (which I think is more accurately described as a verb or action).” (QuantumArtist)

And

“I call this energy "Equanimic" and it is the result of what I call the catiteration of all other energies.”Catiteration" means the removal or reversal of dimensional iteration, or distinctions that separate one kind of energy from another. For example, if you catiterate what you call positive energy and negative energy (assuming these were the only two kinds of iterated energetic), the result would be Equanimic, or the neutral energy, just as you have illustrated with your equations.” (LariAnn)

I believe we are talking about the same thing all three of us, but were using all separate terms and ways to describe it (and maybe some disagree on the specifics). I use the term ‘Ether’ (it a classic, that why I use it) QuantumArtist uses ‘Verb or Action’ and LoriAnn used the term ‘Equanimic’. I don’t think you know this, but you (QuantumArtist) were the one, who made me interested in this forum, remember I commented on your thread. I do believe the 1+-1= ±1, I call the ‘±1’ you speak, ‘ether’.



“Just a minor point of clarification if I may. Ether (or what I call action) is not small... it has no size at all! It is merely action, like a verb in a sentence. Verbs don't have size.” (QuantumArtist)

I do think I described ether correctly, however I see what you meant (in quote above) that it has no size, I agree, but I guess I worded that wrong. I said before in this thread, “but my theory says that the stuff vibrating or the strings ARE ether infinitely big in all directions (fills everything) and infinitely small (still filling all things).” I really did not mean it to sound as if it were a particle or something similar like that. But the way I chose my wording it sounded as if it were a physical particle there, the better way of saying it is: it is a force that fills everything and is infinitely big in all directions (fills everything) and infinitely small (still filling all things), not a particle.



“I do not feel that we can ever design a physical device to tap Equanimic itself” (LariAnn)
I strongly disagree with that statement; if your ‘Equanimic’ is the same as my ‘Ether’ I must say you’re wrong. I believe (and have some experimental bases for my saying that), if you tap into the ether’s resonance there is great potential of energy that is waiting.

LariAnn your thoughts on infinity are intriguing, but not to undermine QuantumArtist in the least, I spent time thinking about his proposal to and liked it as well. However I think LoriAnn has explained her point thoroughly. I especially like her example of the ‘apple universe’ and "I had three apples, but now I have 0" well I believe there cannot be a zero because there are plenty of apples left on a tree somewhere in that apple universe, just like there is plenty of energy left out there somewhere…

When I talk about + or – I am more making the relative relationship of polarity, in atoms there are the + protons and the –electrons, I believe it is the Ether that is stable, I postulate that the – and + are related to the way the stable ether bubble ‘spins’, just for explanations sake, lets say left spin= - and right spin= +. Same spins repel each other, just like incompatible gears trying to turn, were as opposites attract each other also similar to gears. Electrons and Protons ‘like’ each other because there compatible, one pair (lets say hydrogen atom) makes a neutral state. And as more neutral pairs are added (more electrons and protons) some go to a state of being a neutron (if you read earlier in this thread I think I covered it, but if not I believe neutrons are protons and electrons almost “bonded” to each other). When a neutron is formed it allows more protons and electrons (unbounded) to join the whole structure, making an atom.

So far, the ‘largest’ atom that scientist have made an atom without neutrons was around 5 protons and electron pairs, however this degraded to a helium atom with one neutron and a hydrogen atom with small shower of unstable particle and a tad of heat(this was no over unity here, they put in tons more energy then was putout). Intrusting isn’t it…

Do not confuse the + and –‘s I use, I do think ether is all kind of a ±1 soup, when a particle forms from the ether that becomes stable it takes on an – or + in the electromagnet force (it is a part of spin of the ether and the stability of the ether), however the ether that forms the particle is still ±1. Unstable ether cannot last long (ether taking on – or + in just the ether, not electromagnetic field), just like partials can form and un-form with in a fraction of a second and then the ether reverts back to the ether soup from which it came.

[QuantumArtist]

I guess I need to clarify that -1, 1, and 0 are all this ether you speak of. Its the same stuff. All the values strictly relate to "charge" of polarity, not state of existence. I do believe in the 2nd law of thermodynamics which states energy is neither lost or created. Basically, energy just changes from one form to another. Also, the ±1 is not ether itself, but rather a state of ether interaction. My equations merely point out that polarity has a 3rd possible state, a neutral state which I also show in my very simple equations to act very similarly to gravity.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics gives me one other reason to not like dimensions because people are essentially talking about robbing one dimension to fuel our own... the thought of which goes in violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics because that energy didn't exist in our dimension till you robbed it from another. Moving past the fact that I think the first 4 "known" dimensions are merely illusions at the most basic levels of matter and energy and only exist when multiple points of matter and frames of time are considered... you are still talking about CREATING energy in our dimension by robbing it from another, which is essentially destroying it in another.

I also feel that energy fills all space, with or without matter. We only know of action when we see it act upon matter. That doesn't mean that if matter doesn't exist in a space that action doesn't either. When talking about action, we're talking about something that doesn't have a size. Its everywhere, we just don't know it is there without matter to react to it.
_________________
QuantumArtist. Proud high school graduate. Part Science, part artist, all bullsh*t

I'm not going to think you're right till you give me good reason to change my mind!
(Your education is not a good reason)

[LariAnn]

I, too, wish to clarify what the nature of Equanimic is, and why I stated that I do not feel we will ever design a physical device to "tap" it.

Equanimic is infinite potentiality, an everythingness that, when iterated into dimensionality, yields perceivable physical universes complete with all matter and energy forms, plus a lot more that is paraphysical and unknown to current science. Equanimic can never be "used up". Were you able to connect a wire to Equanimic, the wire itself would disiterate into Equanimic on contact. There would be no energy flow because there would be no gradient to produce such a flow.

The net (absolute) value of the physical universe is Equanimic. So trying to connect to Equanimic is like trying to connect two areas of the ocean together; they are already together, they just may be in different geographic locations (analogy). So no flow from one to the other can occur, only iteration and disiteration, which must be mediated by Awareness. No iterated (finitely dimensionalized) device can exist in the presence of "pure" Equanimic, so no physical device will ever be able to measure it, only the effects of it upon dimensionally iterated reality.

So the next question would be, if no device can manipulate Equanimic, how is a physical universe produced from it? That is the intelligence characteristic of Equanimic; it is self-organizing, self-Aware intelligent energetic. The iteration of Equanimic is a conceptual perceptive process, not the bringing of "something" into existence from "nothing". We perceive according to the dimensional limitations of our perceptive apparatus; that's why mystics must become enlightened to actually experience All is One. Their perceptive capability must transcend the limitations of the five human senses.

I suggest that it is Equanimic that can neither be created nor destroyed, and which should be referred to by the 2nd law of thermodynamics, not other forms of energy. When it comes to creating or destroying energy, how you define "create" and "destroy" really makes a difference here! If energy is changed from heat to electricity, is heat "destroyed" and electricity "created"? If energy moves from one dimension to another, is it "destroyed" in one dimension and "created" in another? My point here is that whatever the transformation, the net or absolute value of the system must remain the same (Equanimic). This makes many kinds of transformations possible, some of which might appear to be "creating" or "destroying" matter or energy. This also has profound implications, especially in terms of so-called "good" and "evil", but that is a topic beyond the scope of this thread.

If we can believe it, some mystics have learned to iterate Equanimic directly into a physical iteration, resulting in such experiences as levitation, transmutation of physical objects, or other phenomena. However, in such cases I posit that it is not a physical device (i.e. their bodies) that is manipulating Equanimic, but rather their Awareness modulated by intelligence.

If our perceptive capability were vastly different, what we call the physical universe may become to us as insubstantial as a vapor or mist, or even be refractory to perception altogether.

But we don't need to "tap" Equanimic directly anyway because there are vast amounts of iterated energetic that are available for tapping; for example, the vast energy from the vacuum as described by Tom Bearden. But I bring the concepts of Equanimic and infinity up for discussion because I'm certain that working overunity circuitry cannot be designed without a thorough grasp of them in one manner or other.

LariAnn
http://fractalicawakening.com

[Cryptoscientia]

“Also, the ±1 is not ether itself, but rather a state of ether interaction.” (QuantumArtist)

I could go for that, that is what I called the energy, just the interactions between the ether and matter. That makes sense. I too do believe in the 2nd law of thermodynamics, but an unsure why you and LariAnn both brought it up. I do not believe I have created or destroyed anything in my theory. One thing you have to remember infinity + infinity is still infinity (or is it infinite^2?) Even infinity – one million is = infinity. Are only taking from part of an infinite pool of energy were nothing is created or destroyed.

As for taking something out of a dimension, I haven’t thought about ‘taking’ (destroying) it out of one is creating it in another. The thing is if the dimensions are ringing at there own frequencies, then they do not interact with each other, however, if you can manipulate the ether’s frequency then you can tap into the energy there. All matter is stable ether, so if you ‘ring’ (change ether frequency) that matter to connect with another frequency (the energy is the interactions of matter with ether), then you establish a connection with that ether. But you said (QuantumArtist):

“You are still talking about CREATING energy in our dimension by robbing it from another, which is essentially destroying it in another.”

No I’m not, all ether is connected, I said that before, the only reason why I call it “another dimension” is because of the fact that it is ETHER out of phase with us, and it is all connected however it is out of phase. Think of a radio, all the there tons of frequencies out there, if the radio picked up all frequencies it would be loud static (that is the frequencies of people talking and singing and those that were not used by anyone). When you add a dial you can pick up the desired frequency(and not hear the OUT OF PHASE frequencies at all), so if that is the case then no energy was created or destroyed, only changed to another frequency of ether. So if you consider that light is being created and destroyed, when something such as ‘red shift’ happens then I would agree. I’m just saying all ether is connected and infinite, in all directions in our space, and in all frequencies.

Just like light has billions if not trillions (maybe infinite) of frequencies, but if one light frequency changes to another frequency by red shift or traveling through a substance. Technically it only goes down in energy unless some kind of energy is added, nothing is created and some of the loss is absorbed by the frequency it just left (in some cases light is stretched), so nothing is destroyed.


“I also feel that energy fills all space, with or without matter. We only know of action when we see it act upon matter. That doesn't mean that if matter doesn't exist in a space that action doesn't either. When talking about action, we're talking about something that doesn't have a size. Its everywhere, we just don't know it is there without matter to react to it.” (QuantumArtist)

I agree, I have said before AT LEAST one of the three must exist in any one space that is ether, energy or matter (and of course any combo of two or all of them could also exist).

“The wire itself would disiterate into Equanimic on contact. There would be no energy flow because there would be no gradient to produce such a flow……”(LariAnn) (side note did you mean disintegrate when you wrote, ‘disiterate’ I figured you meant to ‘revert to’ or ‘form back into’, is that correct?)

That is one problem for me as well, as soon as you change the frequency of the matter’s ether, it goes out of phase in this dimension, and once it is out of phase it is no longer can be seen or touched or measured or anything, it’s as if it were never there, however it is there just in a separate frequency.
I still disagree, but if you were to ‘tune’ into two separate frequencies, as if a radio that picks up two frequencies, then you have kind of a ‘telephone call’ where your call is toll free, you call a higher ether level and that higher ether ‘falls’ to the lower ether level, the loss could be made up in energy that is siphoned off the ‘call’ you made.
I hope that makes sense. That would allow something to exist in two ether panes, where you called the higher level to connect to lower level, the theoretical math says that it could be self staining until it slowly ‘cuts’ the call, you would seem to get an over unity effect, BUT really it is the energy that is being used to change frequencies. It would require a large burst of energy to ‘call’ but it would slowly….slowly…..slowly cut off and there would be perhaps thousands (maybe millions) of % out put then in. Remember matter can = energy (e=mc2) and ether = matter, and now you have a big circle that you can go round and round in.

“But we don't need to "tap" Equanimic directly anyway because there are vast amounts of iterated energetic that are available for tapping; for example, the vast energy from the vacuum as described by Tom Bearden.”
LariAnn

I have read studied the theory’s and machines of tom Bearden, and even met him in person, he believes that E=(delta)t c2 (t=change in time) may be another propriety of my ether (I have not looked into it much) He also had over unity machine that was running off of a small source of power and would(he clamed) produce 540% over unity. He believed he ‘made the call’ and above was a similar conversation we had together. (But believe me we had our different views of things…) Can you explain what you meant by, “But we don't need to "tap" Equanimic directly anyway because there are vast amounts of iterated energetic that are available for tapping” please clarify.
It may be that the Iterated energy is ether? I would have said that the Equanimic was ether. Thank you both for the comments, it is always good to hear others opinions.

[QuantumArtist]

Out of phase? Dimensions? Such terms elude my understanding. Actually... they elude anyones understanding by default. Why? Because these terms are so vague they could mean anything.

Please be more specific... if you have to... draw a picture
_________________
QuantumArtist. Proud high school graduate. Part Science, part artist, all bullsh*t

I'm not going to think you're right till you give me good reason to change my mind!
(Your education is not a good reason)

[Cryptoscientia]

Out of phase has a very precise meaning and I thought it to be not vague at all. For example crystal glass (like a wine glass) will break if you send a CERTAIN acoustic (sound) frequency at it, lets say 504 hertz’s(I’m not sure it that’s the one), if you do 500 Hz it is not close enough to break it and if you do 515 Hz it is not close enough to break it. You need a certain frequency!!! If that frequency in not met then it will not break (this is true as long as you do not send more then 140 decibels of sound at it, if you get more then 140 then your just using pure force, not Resonance). When 504 Hz is ‘on’ the glass will break using resonance.

Any frequency that does not break the crystal glass is considered out of phase of the frequency that does break it!!!


Here is another example if you have a set of tuning forks; they are U shaped pieces of metal that are used to tune musical instruments to a certain musical note. When you get two of them of the same musical note hit only ONE of them the other (as long as it is close proximity) will begin to ring even though it was never hit, they had resonance with each other. ANY OTHER TUNING FORK THAT IS NOT THE SAME IS OUT OF PHASE!!! It will not ring with any other tuning fork.

Last example, on a radio there are lots of frequencies (stations) that you can listen to. Then you can pick the desired station that you want to listen to, by tuning it into that station. The other stations do not affect the desired station you want to listen to, because they are OUT OF PHASE!!!

The meaning in physics is this exact why, out of phase is when there is a phase shift or frequency shift in one wave of a set of two (or more) waves. When compared to each other or to desired wave the other waves are considered out of phase. Two oscillators that have the different frequencies and different phases have a phase difference, and the oscillators are said to be out of phase with each other.


The encyclopedia definition of resonance:
“1. Oscillation induced in a physical system when it is affected by another system that is itself oscillating at the right frequency. For example, a swing will swing to greater heights if each consecutive push on it is timed to be in rhythm with the initial swing. Radios are tuned to pick up one radio frequency rather than another using a resonant circuit that resonates strongly with the incoming signal at only a narrow band of frequencies. The soundboards of musical instruments, contrastingly, are designed to resonate with a large range of frequencies produced by the instrument.
2. the state of a system in which an abnormally large vibration is produced in response to an external stimulus, occurring when the frequency of the stimulus is the same, or nearly the same, as the natural vibration frequency of the system.
3. a vibration of large amplitude produced by a relatively small vibration near the same frequency of vibration as the natural frequency of the resonating system”

Anything that is not in resonance with something else is out of phase (yes there are lot of things like this)!!!

As for my definition of a dimension, it is those other ether frequencies, not in resonance with ours because they are out of phase. I only use ‘dimension’ because it denotes a difference, the ether that is out of phase with ours is unnoticeable, untouchable and immeasurable to us even thought it is all around us and in us and the earth everywhere!!! It is out of phase, we can’t see or anything the mater or energy in that 'dimension’ or any ether ‘dimension’ not in resonance with us because it is out of phase with us!!!

The matter that makes up us and our universe is here and we can see it and manipulate it because it is in resonance or in phase if you will with us and the ether in our ‘dimension’. Our universe is tuned to a certain frequency just like a radio is tuned to one frequency.

There are infinite frequencies of ether , they are all those other, ‘stations’ are out of phase with us and is different frequency then ours so it does not resonate with us.

I drew a picture but couldn’t get it on, so try to use an imagination please:

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ 10 Hz

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ 10 Hz

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ 10 Hz

These three 'waves' are in resonance with each other(above) they all interact with each other and are considered in there own dimension(one not three).


\_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_ 5 Hz

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ 10 Hz

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv 20 Hz

These three 'waves' are out of phase; they do not interact and are considered in three separate dimensions, all apart from each other.

Just like a speaker could make all these frequencies and more, ether and do the same thing, that is why ether is all connected. It is like a speaker or the antenna tower for the many frequencies and each frequency of ether in another dimension to us because we cannot do anything to it!!! We are tuned to our dimension and not to any others, even though there are infinite amount of others out there, they are all out of phase.

[QuantumArtist]

So, out of phase applies to sound? You see... when I speak of energy, I speak of something so basic, it can only be described as action. Its so very basic that I have to liken it to a verb in a sentence. There is no wave at that level of existence, the wave itself is defined by the stuff I speak of. Its much more basic.

So to be out of phase, we're talking about similarity in wave related type events? I ask this because there is so many more types of energy events then those made by waves and particle carriers. For example, I think any and all matter is effected by the ±1 energy I mention in my theory, but that its nature defies the wave/frequency event we recognize in polar energy events. Effectively, all matter is its carrier particle, and it doesn't have a wave... it simply moves directly for other ±1 bodies.

The other confusion lies in when people mention being out of phase with our dimension because they don't clarify if they're talking about another dimension as in height, length, width or time... or if they're talking about some carbon copy existence overlapping ours. I've heard both theories, and nobody every clarifies when they mention dimensions.

So, when YOU mention dimensions, are you talking about wave/carrier phenomina? If so, what about other forms of energy... like those that could be existing at the 0 or what I believe is more accurately existing in the ±1 state? Or are you referring to the carbon copy reality concept, and if so you pretty much lose me altogether because such talk is pure conjecture, being unprovable.

Out of phase with our reality?!? Yeah... you said it.
_________________
QuantumArtist. Proud high school graduate. Part Science, part artist, all bullsh*t

I'm not going to think you're right till you give me good reason to change my mind!
(Your education is not a good reason)

[Cryptoscientia]

“So, out of phase applies to sound?” (QuantumArtist)
Yes out of phase can apply to sound, think of the tuning forks and the violin and the breaking glass.

“You see... when I speak of energy, I speak of something so basic, it can only be described as action. Its so very basic that I have to liken it to a verb in a sentence. There is no wave at that level of existence, the wave itself is defined by the stuff I speak of. Its much more basic.” (QuantumArtist)

Ether is quantum fluctuations, that exist everywhere!!! They have no size, no particles that make it up, it is like the main force of everything, and it fills everything and is found everywhere. It doesn’t have ‘waves’ but can exhibit a frequency. It is the most basic of all stuff, I think it is like a ‘potential verb’ when it is just there (so it is not a verb until it dose something) when it does something it becomes energy or makes up the verb you talk about (the interactions of matter to ether). I decided the verb is not ether, but the energy in my theory(the action).

And when Ether is stable it makes up matter (a point of action, in this case the action is being stable). I consider Ether neutral until it stabilizes even if only for a second or a billion years. There are forms of stable neutral matter, such as a neutron, witch is made up of an electron – and proton +.

Particle accelerators are like studying how a TV is made by tossing it off the empire states building and studying the remains. Most particles that are found in particle accelerators have particles that are made and die within the very same second. That is like saying that some of the TV remains just disappear into thin are, never to be seen again (breaking the 2 law of thermodynamics). When particles ‘die’ leavening no trace, scientist have no clue (only theory’s) on what is happening to them. I believe that they are unstable ether and they revert back to the ether from witch they came.




“So, when YOU mention dimensions, are you talking about wave/carrier phenomina? If so, what about other forms of energy... like those that could be existing at the 0 or what I believe is more accurately existing in the ±1 state” (QuantumArtist)

Well the wave/carrier phenomena fits in the energy definition, it is the interactions between ether and matter. All forms of energy are just the interactions between Ether and Matter.

When something that is matter that gains an – or + charge, it is not an ‘ether’ charge but fits into my energy definition, it is an interaction of the ‘spin’ of the stable ether in the ‘ether soup’ it came from. (Remember the gear stuff I talked about in one of the last post).
What other types of energy would fit into your, “±1 state”?

For example if gravity is one of them, the stable ether in a matter state has a “drag” type effect (caused by resonance of two same frequencies) in the ether where it came from, causing the ether to condense just a slight bit around a single particle of matter, this ‘drag’ is amplified when lots of stable particles or energy are around (such as earth or sun’s gravity, more particles= to more gravity). This drag makes an imbalance in the ether and other stable particles are drawn to it (to fill the in balance).

The interaction of the stable particles is condensing a little bit of ether around a particle. That is the action happening to the ether and to the matter. That is what makes up gravity.

As for dimensions,
The ‘other dimensions’ are all the other possible frequencies of ether.
One thought I had was that we see light in a small spectrum, light such as radio waves, microwaves and x-ray are all out of phase to us, because our eyes are designed to pick up only a certain band of frequencies, only visible light.

‘Other dimensions’ only says that there are other frequencies of ether out there we cannot see or feel or anything, because they are out of phase to us.

However space can have many frequencies of light at any one time, air can have many sound frequencies at one time, so can ether have many frequencies at one time.

I only use light and sound as comparisons of ether, I do not say that they are the same but they do have similar proprieties. The primary purpose I use light and sound to describe ether is for the similar events such as being ‘out of phase’ that way I could explain it, but light and sound are not the same as ether. I could not really think of an example without using a comparison.

[LariAnn]

I want to pipe in and explain what I mean when I write about "dimensions"

Essentially, my use of the term means the parameters required to define an object in space/time. Such parameters are actually going to be fractions of whole dimensions, which to me are limited parameters of infinite measure, such as a line of infinite length, or a plane of infinite area. Physical objects have finite parametric measurements, hence I have to call their "dimensions" fractional. In my book and writings, I call these finite measurements made along whole dimensions by the term, dimensionals. That, therefore, makes finite objects fractalic, or like a fractal.

While most people think of length, width, and height as the dimensions of an object, there is no way an object is completely defined by using measurements along just those three dimensions.

The idea that you can "go to another dimension" is, IMHO, a misuse or misapplication of the term "dimension". In much the same way as people misuse the term "love", people use the term "dimension" to mean all kinds of things that are not dimensions at all.

The concept that dimensions are illusory is correct, but that does not mean that they are not useful in defining objects in space/time. In fact, all of the panfractalic is illusory, as any enlightened mystic will tell you, but that does not stop us from participating in the experience and learning from it!

The only reality that is unchanging is Infinity, but the illusory nature of finity, or finite reality, becomes glaringly evident when you include Infinity in your conception.

As for the other energies that can be tapped instead of Equanimic, there are many well known (magnetic fields, wind, solar, etc.) and others not so well known, such as radiant energy and others not yet accepted by the orthodox scientific community. You can get your energy second, third, or other hand, as in from geothermal, wind, waves, or etc., or you can get the energy from the same place these sources get their energy. That is where overunity is to be found.

LariAnn
http://fractalicawakening.com

[QuantumArtist]

So here is the problem gents. 2nd law of thermodynamics (lets just call it 2ndTD) says energy is neither lost, or created... The concept tapping into infinite energy would seem to clash with this endless energy at the other end of the dimension concept you're both talking about. Primarily because the 2ndTD says energy essentially IS finite.

I believe energy is eternal and infinite, but not recreated. I think ultimately, energy is very simply, just action. Action however can take many forms, and that the capacity to change is exactly what makes it eternal and infinite. If you guys follow that reasoning, what you may actually be talking about is CONVERSION of a form of energy to one we can use.

If so you're talking pretty much about PERPETUAL energy not endless energy.

Reason I bring this up is that I'm not at all convinced that this action/energy exists "out of phase". Merely our concept of a certain few phenominon exceeds our understanding or capacity to measure the results. Action ultimately effects everything, and is everywhere, regardless of phase, dimension, or even the presence of matter. Frequency is but one of many manifestations of an intangible action force which defines it.

Perhaps your phase theory could be worked to CONVERT one form of energy to one we can use at our level of understanding. I certainly hope so! Its just to say that I'm 100% sure that in doing so, you'd be converting the truest, most basic unit of energy/action (the verb of life), just a manifestation thereof.

For every force, power, or anomaly you can conceive, there is a definition. There will always be a governing power which defines the anomaly. THAT is the true energy of the universe. It dictates everything we see, everything we define, and the potentials of every outcome. Its the verb of everything.
_________________
QuantumArtist. Proud high school graduate. Part Science, part artist, all bullsh*t

I'm not going to think you're right till you give me good reason to change my mind!
(Your education is not a good reason)