There are so many different theroys about how the universe started. What one do you believe?

Read "Angelic Realities" by "Ashayana Deane" aka "Anna Hayes". She really goes into detail races, starts from 250 billion years ago up to the present. Goes into detail on the fightings, hybrids, Draco, Annu, Gray, ... everything that you ever wanted to know. Worth the $15.

Yeah, I don’t think I’m going to read that, I don't believe in those kinds of things. We don’t know what aliens look like, we haven't been visited by aliens (Atleast from what we know). So I believe that the book is just a fantasy novel written to keep imaginative minds aroused. Thanks for the suggestion though

[edit on 20-9-2009 by Maddogkull]

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by halfmask

Originally posted by Maddogkull
reply to post by halfmask

 

Can you please explain more of your concept?

It is not my concept... I am merely presenting it. This youtube video sums up Nassim's theory better then I did, and it also gives you an idea of what a spectral shape is.

There’s something about Nassim Haramein......there’s a youtude video of him misidentifying Comet Neat as Nibiru and pretty much everything he says on there is wrong.

He is a bit eccentric on some hypothetical stuff and he does seem to see aliens at work for a lot of stuff, but if you look into his hard science in his papers and if you see his newer lectures, the one in that vid is in 2001, his stuff is a lot more solid and he cuts back on the eccentric stuff a bit. The thing is most of his work was criticized by scientists early on, but eventually they found proof for much of his work that they originally pretty much labeled him a crack pot for, though he now proved them wrong and that he was right. Who knows he could be right about a lot of his eccentric things too. But, really you have to try and find his newer lectures, 2003 and sooner, before 2003 his stuff was just a hypothesis and he didn’t work out all the math and didn't sort the evidence yet, his newer stuff is really solid, it is a fully fleshed out theory with lots of evidence to support it. And remember everyone originally thought Einstein was a loon until he showed up Newton with a bucket of water and rope.

Also on another note, for those of you tinkering about string theory, it has been proven mostly wrong, its a dieing theory. There are servial papers and stuff on its problems this link below is the one I found first.

Link

You can search in google "string theory dead" "String theory wrong" and you will get many more articles and some papers.

It was repeatedly broken mathematically, in many cases it disagreed with its self, it lacks evidence and doesn’t predict much especially compared to theories out there that predict much more.

What concepts do you agree with so far?

Originally posted by Maddogkull
What concepts do you agree with so far?

Well, so far I agree with Nassim Haramein's theory the most. Make sure you note that I agree with his mathematical theories and that I am skeptical on his more "eccentric" hypotheses. To fully understand his work you will have to watch his full lectures, ideally the newer the better. Be warned his lectures are long, I watched an 8 hr one and a newer 4.5 hour long one and those are just sum ups. Physics is not simple, especially when it comes to the origins of the universe.

It's so long ago, I don't remember, I was very small at the time. But, as I recall it went something like this. The spiritual/material division was created with a small amount of energy from the purely spiritual division. At the bottom of this region, the material/spiritual division was created which includes this planet. It was created because spirits needed to be able to descend to this "density" in order to remain conscious and work out their imperfections. Yes, you could find some indications in the creation that it all started at one time. And if you where very naive you might think that it just happens by itself. Like a stick of dynamite just arbitrary explodes itself. No, intelligence arranged it to happen.

reply to post by halfmask


Ya, i really dont agree with his views on how theres no dark mattre, black holes or how the universe is not expanding. Sounds pretty weird if you ask me.

reply to post by halfmask


I have been watching more of his videos, but since you are more experienced with his work, can you anwser some questions for me. He says all of us are black hole, but how are the black holes actually formed???? Also if you would could you just explain the main basis of the Unified field theory??? Like were all inside an atom??? How many universes are there??? It just seems confusing

Originally posted by Maddogkull
reply to post by halfmask

 

Ya, i really dont agree with his views on how theres no dark mattre, black holes or how the universe is not expanding. Sounds pretty weird if you ask me.

I actually agree with him on all of those, those are actually the meat and bones of his work. Cosmologists made up dark matter to explain the 96% of missing gravitational forces, there so far is no proof for it. Nassim's calculations using The Schwarzschild Proton model or schwarzschild’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations actually accounts for the missing 96%, so there is no reason to explain it away with the "dark matter". The universe is also most likely not expanding, the expanding universe theory was made using very little evidence, at first Einstein didn't support it, then he did, then he wasn't sure. With info from NASA's recent telescopes, they are almost confirming that the universe is indeed NOT expanding. Also, the black hole part is very important, it’s the core of Nassim’s theory, it ties together all the forces and shows that the strong and weak nuclear forces are actually quantum gravity at work.

Originally posted by Maddogkull
reply to post by halfmask

 

I have been watching more of his videos, but since you are more experienced with his work, can you anwser some questions for me. He says all of us are black hole, but how are the black holes actually formed???? Also if you would could you just explain the main basis of the Unified field theory??? Like were all inside an atom??? How many universes are there??? It just seems confusing

This stuff is not all that easy to sum up. It took a 4 hour lecture of his for me to just get the general Idea of it all. If you’re really wanting to learn about his theories read his papers, he keeps publishing them. I think he has 3 out now.

This link Here. Has all 3 of his papers and one summary paper on his work so far. His paper "What is the Origin of Spin?" explains how all this happens. His paper "The Schwarzschild Proton" explains how Schwarz child’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations actually end up explaining all the forces. The paper "Short Synopsis of the Scale Unification Paper" sums up how all objects in the known universe are actually different scale black holes including us humans and cells.

The "Unified field theory" is the ideal theory for physics or of all science, Einstein tried to find it and many current scientists still are. It is a theory that would unify all know physics in one consistent master theory, or even further it will unify all science, including physics, chemistry, biology, geology, est. under one super master theory that explains everything. Nassim's current theory pretty much single handedly unified all of physics and just might unify all of science.


I will try to sum up what he did for you in super layman terms. Basically in physics we have a lot of niche theories that explain certain things, but for the most part they don't seem to agree with each other in uniform fashion. The most famous disagreement is general relativity Vs. quantum mechanics. They explain their own areas perfectly but disagree with each other in the whole picture.

Nassim found that the main reason for this is that most of our current used solutions to equations are cop outs, basically scientist cheat and use in a sense "trick" math to make the equations easier by focusing on certain situations, but these situations are only in certain conditions and are not the average conditions. As such our current equations according to Nassim appear to disagree with each other, but what he found with the original solutions to Einstein’s field equations (general relativity), Schwarzschilds solutions where actually correct. They were the first solutions, but since they predicted black holes and at the time no one saw any evidence for black holes they stopped using them.

But now we know there are black holes but they still did not go back and use the original solutions, the new solutions use trick math to remove the black holes form the equations, or the torque if you will, and the lack of this gravitation torque makes it seem like we are missing 96% of the gravitational forces while we are actually not.

Nassim went back and used the original Schwarzschild equations with our current semi classical model, which appeared to solve everything and seemingly unified all the forces. As such he tried Schwarzschilds solutions on atoms and realized that an atom is a black hole and that the strong and weak forces are actually gravity just at a smaller scale.

Nassim then ended up graphing all know objects in the universe according to their plantar length, energy output and mass, and realized they were all forming a pattern. They all formed and obeyed the conditions of a Schwarzschild black hole. This includes all different scales of galaxies, quasars, stars, planets, moons, atoms, sub atomic particles and humans, animals and cells, even genetic code obeyed the rules of the conditions.
He then went on to calculate a lot of many things and found that the universe is all because of 3 things, the shape of space which is a super infinite dense perfectly balanced bundle of infinite energy, electromagnetic and gravitational forces.

Basically the shape of space governs all forms of physics. Electromagnetism or light or radiation is the force the pulls everything apart or is the force of destruction, while gravity is the force of creation by binding things together. His paper “What is the origin of spin?” goes over why these forces are unbalanced and how they go on to form everything in the universe.
This uniformed scalar model not only puts all physics together but also shows that these rules apply to other fields of science as well, so basically a unified theory. He also has tons of evidence for this theory. His newer lecture has a lot and it just blew me away, how much it explains how much it predicts and how all the new things NASA are finding supports this theory.

He goes on and explains how space is the foundation of everything and that the universe and everything is a true spectral and that everything is just a part of this spectral at a different scale.

This theory is not only a massive new level of insight into how our universe works but it explains so much and will open us up to amazing new technologies. Actually knowing how the forces work together it will make it far easier for us to advance tech wise. I am fallowing Nassim’s work very closely, so far it is the only theory I know that is a potential unified theory with supporting evidence. Nassim has many more calculations to do and many more papers to write but so far so good. His work is defiinitly worth fallowing. If you are turly intersted try to find a place where you can watch his full lectures.

Well the downside for me is that i live far out of town, so as of now i only have dial-up. So videos are hard for me to aquire. Just a few more questions if you dont mind me asking. Does Nasseim believe then the big bang did occur? Did he talk about how creation was made by some kind of "creative force", or was it made randomly?? Did he believe in a big bounce theroy?? Those are just a couple of questions i would like answer if you dont mind Also if everyone are black holes, what are the black holes we see in space?? The grand version of us??

Wow, I am so sorry for the super late reply... the over 2 year wait... I can't even remember how I forgot about this thread.

Also for the record I am dyslexic and words some times flip, I re-read the thread and realized I was using the wrong term the whole time, when I was saying "spectral" I meant "fractal", I apologize for this, it may clear up some things.

About those questions about what does Nasseim believe for some of those theories listed I am not sure.

It has been a few years since the start of this thread, with that I disappointingly must say Nasseim has revealed not much more work publicly, but some times these things take a long time.

As for myself, Nasseim's theory is one that is still on my watch list, others I am looking at are "thunderbolts" electric universe theory, holographic universe theory and potentially using cybernetics to explain some type of quantum electrical gravitational theory hybrid. Also, I am waiting on to see the results when the large hadron collider is turn up to higher power.

Also, I finally am heading of to university, gonna be trying to get into engineering physics as my specialty. I will start learning much more.