It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Vibrations and density - what does that mean exactly?

page: 1
2
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 06:08 PM
Is it referring to how thick/thin the mass is? Like would beings of high vibration be of low density and invisible to us because of that?

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 06:24 PM
Hmm i think when something vibrates faster is has a more definite shape, while something vibrating slower or lower moves much less and has a less defined shape ( invisible )

I have never really understood how weight worked into it all, it just does i guess.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 06:56 PM
mmmm.... i'm not a scientist, but, everything has a resonate freq that it vibrates at regardless of mass

so everything vibrates, right down to the quantum lvl as in string theory

so i don't think that would affect what they look like or anything

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:04 PM
reply to post by Donnie Darko

Well quantum strings vibrate at certain frequencies which create different forms of matter, well as the leading theory goes. I guess that would be what they are speaking about possibly.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:13 PM

Originally posted by phi1618
Hmm i think when something vibrates faster is has a more definite shape, while something vibrating slower or lower moves much less and has a less defined shape ( invisible )

I have never really understood how weight worked into it all, it just does i guess.

Actually it's the opposite.

Move your hand slowly and then fast, look at which one has a more definite shape.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:21 PM
I believe the idea is that everything (matter) only differs because of the frequency they vibrate at. If something vibrates at one frequency it is something like Hydrogen but if the frequency can be raised to the frequency of let’s say a photon then that material becomes a photon or whatever else that frequency produces. The density would be the amount of space that material would take up but this would be lower density not higher.

I’m not a physicist this is just my simplistic understanding of basic string or M theory.

I believe some people just hijacked these concepts in the UFO field because it is not very well understood (including me) and sounds scientific. People say higher density because it sounds better than lower.
Again, I’m not a physicist and could be completely off on this but wanted to share.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:24 PM
Water molecules...

'vibrating' at a high frequency you get steam, vapor

Slow em down you get liquid water

Slow em down some more you get solid ice

Sorta works like that...

Increase the resonance of objects and like the crystal glass it will shatter.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by zorgon]

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:27 PM

EXCELLENT explanation, and you are correct according to modern M-Theory

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:31 PM
yes, we do tend to run into these words a lot, dont we?

"vibrations" and "density" do have actual valid scientific meaning.

unfortunately, they are more often than not *key* words you can use to identify someone whom doesnt have a freaking clue what they are talking about.

_____

on a less hostile note: i dont mind so much people talking mumbo-jumbo....i do it quite a lot, myself. it just bothers me when they use words such as these to assert some kind of quasi-scientific validity to their beliefs.

mumbo-jumbo is mumbo-jumbo.

science is science.

let us not confuse the two.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 07:53 PM
MODS- please don't ban me for this:

But I've always KNOWN when I was doing hard drugs, (acid, mesc.), that it SLOWED things down and allowed me to observe something that was hidden to normal vision. (Demons, Angels, the HIDDEN).

I HAVE seen these things and I firmly believe they are the result of bringing "yourself" down to a lower vibrational frequency.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:01 PM
Heroin or crystal meth are hard drugs...mescaline and lsd are eye opening educational ones.But yes,it's my understanding that there are strings of energy that vibrate at different frequencies inside the nucleus of atoms which give matter its different properties...i thought there was some rift in the scientific community about string theory these days though.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:04 PM

There is always a rift in science,lol. Yea, not all accept it, but most do. It is just really hard to test adeuqetly with current technology, although soe upcoming tests at CERN may be able to make some large progress towards proving M-Theory.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:08 PM

Is it the graviton particle they are trying to find? higgs boson etc?...If they don't find it i guess string theory holds no weight.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:12 PM

The rift in the scientific community is the problem that many of the theories can be proven on paper or mathematics it may not be possible to observe it or “touch” it (yet). This is a difficult concept because what can you use detect or observe something so small. However many of the theories “fit” and “work” because it works to explain other things that “are” observable.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:14 PM

Those are a few, but there are some more as well. If they do not find them it does not mean string theory holds no weight though, the math is superb, but the technology just may not be there. It will take some time to prove these very complex theorems. The attempt to prove M-Theory is the most important IMHO, if they can show a loss of gravity into 'nothing' after a collision that will prove M-Theory beyond any likely doubt, as it will confirm the theory of the Universe resting on a membrane and gravity 'leaking out' off the 'edges' into hyperspace. If this experiment is successful it will be two fold, it would also prove the gravitons existence (they would be detected and detected being lost). So as they say, it is all on the important graviton, much more than the God particle (Higgs Boson). Let us just hope the technology is there to be able to reproduce the enormous energy requried to test this.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:15 PM
There is no calculation to the invisible because we as physical beings don't have that knowledge to measure and to call it anything but invisible.

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:22 PM

M-theory...makes sense if you visualize it,im hardly going to try and refute the great steven hawkings of course.Well,i guess we will find out after they fix the damn thing,get it up and running and trawl though the results for a few years.Just have a gut feeling they wont find what they are looking for...im not scientifically minded though so

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:27 PM

Is it the graviton particle they are trying to find? higgs boson etc?...If they don't find it i guess string theory holds no weight.

The Higgs boson is a predicted particle predicted by the Standard Model. It’s like a fill in the blanks on the table of the elements. If it is wrong than it is something else. That’s the way science works if it is wrong then it corrected not just thrown out.

en.wikipedia.org...

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 08:37 PM

Sure there is there is a wide spectrum of invisible to us. Our eyes only see a very little of the whole spectrum. X-ray gama ray are invisible but still can be measured.

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 10-8-2009 by BartS]

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 09:32 PM

Originally posted by MajesticJax
MODS- please don't ban me for this:

But I've always KNOWN when I was doing hard drugs, (acid, mesc.), that it SLOWED things down and allowed me to observe something that was hidden to normal vision. (Demons, Angels, the HIDDEN).

I HAVE seen these things and I firmly believe they are the result of bringing "yourself" down to a lower vibrational frequency.

Not to go against what you said, but it may be a case that slows down your natural mind and lifts your spirit to a higher frequency...thus making everything else seem slow.

But what you said is right some drugs make things seem more slow and have heaps more clarity.

new topics

2