Schumann Resonances, Electro Magnetism, and the Brain.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I don't take the theorists' word for it. I explore what the theorists are saying and compare what they say with other theorists and try to connect dots. No, I don't do experiments. Sorry, but that makes me want to laugh! Yeah I'm going to do experiments in my kitchen!

You can do plenty of experiments in your kitchen! The laws of nature are the same there as anywhere else. Why does it make you want to laugh?

I'm not going to try to put into my own words that link I've already referred you to.

Thats too bad, that is exactly what I was hoping to get from you.

So, why don't you tell us about your theory?

In good time

Originally posted by sinohptik
You can do plenty of experiments in your kitchen!

Okay. Please suggest one!

Having just messed with the kitchen faucet for awhile I had to chime in on this. ahah -- no light. So his thread version and it still hasn't worked.... to create electricity from water flow using antigravity levition principles.

reply to post by Mary Rose


hmm.. where to even begin..

First, its not so much the location as it is the methods used. The location is simply a space in which you can carry out experiments as the laws of nature, for all intents and purposes, do not change. That being said, here are some links to some kitchen specific experiments. To most, many of these will seem "basic," but they lay a good foundation for our own understanding and a basis for which to explore. Again, most will discard some of the "basic" experiments since they have "already been done." However, if they have not been done by oneself, then there is plenty of exploration to take place. I even encourage others to come up with experiments of their own design to explore principles they think might be applicable and then utilized. Get creative!

Kitchen science experiments.

Learning about laws of nature with food.

Some more food experiments using household items.

An issue with some is that many of these are linked with "kids play." Regardless of that, they can demonstrate the laws of nature in a very clear way. The idea behind science is to find patterns that we can utilize reliably. Therefore, any properly controlled experiment can work in this regard. The limit is, literally, your imagination.

Want to explore EM? Here is a good start.

Want to explore biology? Here is a good start.

Want to explore general physics? Here is a good start.

Want to explore relativity? Here is a good link.

Here is a good general link.

You can even build your own particle accelerator:



Did you know that utilization of this technology is used in CRT electron guns? (dont mess with these things if you are not confident in your knowledge and ability. Seriously.)

Well, thats a brief start, at least. The limitations are the laws of nature and your imagination. You can come up with any tests you want to. You can create your own measuring devices. You can create your own utilizations of observed patterns. The biggest difference between a home made experiment and a large funded one tend to be in data collection. It can also be in scale, and access to sample pools. But, that doesnt change the observer. How do you want to test the universe around you? Its all up to you.

To add:

Lets take the simple charged comb vs. running water (typically out of a faucet).

We can do the experiment quite easily, but its what we do with it that makes all the difference.

How much charge is on the comb?

How does that relate to how much the water moves?

Do the properties/make up of the water (chemically, flow rate, diameter of flow, etc) affect the movement?

Do the properties/make up of the comb (chemically, width of teeth, length of teeth, tooth spacing, etc) affect the movement?

How can we use what we learned with these patterns to test it further?

How can the consistent patterns we find be utilized in other mediums?

Etc.

reply to post by sinohptik


Thanks!

How will these experiments help me make up my mind about whether or not black holes do exist, (along with white holes)? Or whether they're the reverse of a star in another universe?

Originally posted by sinohptik
Want to explore EM? Here is a good start.

I can see me actually using this .pdf as a guideline for setting up experiments at home with the assistance of members of my family. My brother is an electrical engineer who is recently retired, and my older son is interested in tinkering with alternate methods of generating electricity. I also have a grandson for whom I will be looking for projects to provide an outlet for his curiosity should he demonstrate an interest. (He's only 18 months old right now, though! )

One thing I see right away in this .pdf is the reference to the "transverse nature of magnetic force." What about Tesla's longitudinal standing waves? Were you following this thread back on pages 8 and 10?

reply to post by fulllotusqigong


Thanks for posting this. You've sent me to Wikipedia and the dictionary. I had never heard of Kelvin's water dropper before.

Kelvin is very mainstream, correct? I'm fascinated that Viktor Schauberger's work is associated here by this YouTuber.

So, we have what Kelvin called his water-dropping condenser to compare to Schauberger's waterthread experiment?

Here are the three videos the YouTuber links to:







The third one's in German but I think it's fun to watch the visuals!

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by sinohptik

 

Thanks!

How will these experiments help me make up my mind about whether or not black holes do exist, (along with white holes)?

Because experiments develop your ability to think and to see connections between what we really observe and how theory might approach this. It's a skill.

reply to post by buddhasystem


Okay. I'll buy that.

reply to post by pianopraze


If you are interested in emf waves and the effects on the mind and the body, read some of Robert O Becker books. He is a Doctor, and a scientist and his research shows even low emf waves can effect the body and brain negatively. Some of his research showed more of an impact on a the human body with lower frequencies. It changes the cells in or bodies and there is research out there but it gets suppressed. We are bombarded by it everyday with cell phones, laptops, and all the other frequecies running through the air and it gets worse and worse every year with al lthe wireless technologies.

Originally posted by HODOSKE
We are bombarded by it everyday with cell phones, laptops, and all the other frequecies running through the air and it gets worse and worse every year with al lthe wireless technologies.

It worries me that we are so dependent upon these things that we fail to take action or do anything about the situation because we can't imagine that a solution is doable - we feel overwhelmed by the pervasiveness and throw up our hands thinking there's nothing we can do; it's hopeless. And there are so many other things to worry about as well, such as the "totalitarian tiptoe" as David Icke calls it, and global financial meltdown.

Originally posted by HODOSKE
We are bombarded by it everyday with cell phones, laptops, and all the other frequecies running through the air and it gets worse and worse every year with all the wireless technologies.

This applies, with few or no exceptions, to all advances in human culture and technology. Smoked meat tastes great but may contain carcinogen. Before the invention of the automobile, there were no car accidents and/or deaths associated with same. Nuclear energy is actually cleaner, under normal conditions, than coal powered plants but of course we have had Chernobyl and Fukushima.

For every death due to brain cancer caused by a cellphone (no clear evidence yet but there may be a link) there is a life saved by a 911 call from a cell phone. I would like to also note that the actual energy density we are subjected to is not growing too rapidly at all. The spectrum is regulated and actually sold in frequency bands, at auctions, so cell companies can't inflict microwave cooking upon your house even if they wanted to (expensive for them as well). As to the number of WiFi devices in your house, you can stick with a wired LAN if you want to. Mercifully, Maxwell's equations guarantee that the power falls off rapidly with distance, so I won't be worried about a few WiFi cards located 10 yards away from me. At the same time, I avoid carrying my phone on my belt (too close to kidneys and other organs that matter). It's all common sense.

Be reasonable, and don't worry too much.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Okay. I'll buy that.

Thanks Mary. You see, a strong reaction I have from many of your posts stems from same. Let's imagine you are a car mechanic who spent 30 years of their lives fixing and tuning cars. You know how cars work because, on daily basis, you keep tweaking the ignition, changing the starter motors and replacing transmission fluid. Then someone comes around and says that cars actually run on cosmic energy which shines on Earth in a perfect proportion of 5:3 (or any other such thing). You would love to know how exactly this is happening, and what evidence they have, but they keep invoking tuning forks and divine guidance. You see, I'm not even veering too much from verbiage used in these threads. I looked at my transmission fluid and there is plenty of chemistry going on but no evidence of divine intervention.

No experiment that you can do in your kitchen, garage or even at the LHC will allow you to reach definitive conclusions on the physics of black holes. However, just like to judge original Chinese poetry you need to know some Chinese, you need basic knowledge of how things work in that area of research, I mean physics. I've studied diffraction in my teens, with an old camera, it was way cool. And yes, I spent too much time looking at muons, and when and if someone tells me what I measured was a figment of imagination, you know what my reaction might be.

reply to post by buddhasystem


Now, BS, you've blown it.

I don't appreciate your remarks. How condescending!

You've shown your lack of research and your narrow view in your posts.

And I'm not one bit impressed.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Now, BS, you've blown it.

I don't appreciate your remarks. How condescending!

Well Mary, at least I don't create numerous posts which contain remarks like "Einstein and his idiots", or express disdain for science because supposedly it's all s sham, outside of vibrational orgone-based donuts like Rodin's.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I have the DVD Stars in an Electric Universe, produced by The Thunderbolts Project & Silver Wolf Productions Inc., which is of a lecture given by Wal Thornhill in 2011.

Now I'm reading The Thunderbolts Project's e-book The Universe Electric. From page 83:



When an equation exists to fill in a gap, how is it justified at all? Isn't it a fiction?

reply to post by Mary Rose


Please reconsider his words Mary. He is actually quite honest in that post, with little to no perceivable condescension. He is speaking candidly and respectfully.

He also managed to answer your questions to me, for me. I obviously do not always agree with buddhasystem, but he has a point here. And made it respectfully.

To add:

I am not saying Relativity is complete. Einstein himself would agree, and did so through his actions. Just because he is considered "standard" science does not mean it is not representative of truth. It is just missing a few pieces.

ALL human contextual understanding of the universe will be limited. However, the most objective language we can use is mathematics based on experimentation. It is far from fiction. Those very "scientists" that you quoted about the electric universe undoubtedly use mathematics themselves.

The tricky part comes into play when we consider that according to our understanding, the mathematics system we have derived from the patterns of the universe itself is infinitely divisible. This can lead us to leaps that are largely unsubstantiated in anything other than the mathematics itself. This is where I agree with your quote. When experimentation can not be done, but the math seems to align with reality, we must consider that our understanding is incomplete. But it is no more fiction than the computer that you are using right now to type your responses.

The electric universe theories, while intriguing, still tend to use the exact same mathematics for the physical behavior they attempt to describe. They just use different subjective language. Its an important distinction!

Simply put, the labels are irrelevant. It is the math and experimentation that lead to growth and learning in science. And that, ostensibly, has no end as far as we humans are concerned.

It could be labelled magnetism, it could be labelled gravity, it could be labelled "dumplings." What is pertinent is the patterns we explore can consistently predict further phenomena, and we do this exclusively through math. We can effectively input a variable to take the place of hitherto unexplained behavior, and it makes the equation no less valid. Just incomplete. This is the very thing that the quest of experimentation attempts to answer. The unexplained variable of an incomplete equation.

Perhaps its would be wise to ignore the differences in labels altogether until we have a better understanding of the equations themselves.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
"Einstein and his idiots"

Gaede is an original thinker with good ideas and has a reason for his approach.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
express disdain for science because supposedly it's all s sham

I have pointed out valid problems with mainstream science. You have a blind eye to them. You're part of the problem.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
vibrational orgone-based donuts like Rodin's.

Alternative science is where progress will eventually be made, despite the sometimes brutal suppression by the powers that be behind mainstream science.

Originally posted by sinohptik
I am not saying Relativity is complete. Einstein himself would agree, and did so through his actions. Just because he is considered "standard" science does not mean it is not representative of truth. It is just missing a few pieces.

My sense now is that it's not that GR is incomplete, it's that gravity does not work in the universe the way Einstein said it does. And the math we have is there to make it look as if it did.