posted on May, 26 2013 @ 03:14 PM
Originally posted by micpsi
The Higgs particle was not discovered last year. It was re-discovered last year. The particle was originally described in 1959 (about five
years before Higgs and others even conceived of it) with a yogic form of remote viewing called 'anima' in Sanskrit:
If you want to know what is the real "God particle" in the sense of the particle being the subatomic manifestation of the divine, then study this:
and understand that it is a subquark state of the E8xE8 heterotic superstring. The proof of this has been available to the public for over 33 years
but has been ignored because the proof is too technical for most people except theoretical physicists to understand, and the latter don't want to
destroy their careers by endorsing the research. Quarks were described paranormally in 1895 - nearly 70 years before physicists Gell-Mann and Zweig
hypothesized their existence. Leading parapsychologists, Fellows of the Royal Society and Nobel Prize winners in physics know about the scientific
proof of this claim but are too scared to talk about it in public in case their public endorsement of an astounding proof of the existence of ESP
destroys their reputations.
What's the physical basis of whatever-this-is? Is it information? Is it momentum? Is it based on change?
What is its own quantum expression? It must have a quantized indivisible unit expression, since it obviously does the rinse-repeat
structure/complexity thing, so what is its quantized indivisible unit expression? All I see is highly developed geometric illustrations that represent
complex arrangements of basic shapes, with terms that mean absolutely nothing to someone who speaks the English language suggesting that these
Spirograph doodles mean something that's also not actually described in a way that anyone can translate into normal English. I've had plenty of
exposure to widely used physics terms, and even a lot of fairly obscure physics terminology, but if those specific labels have any correlation to the
physics terminology in use across the rest of the planet, then it's not evident.
To be honest, I'd be surprised if you could actually explain any of it in your own words, or in words that exist within the English language. It's
pretty, but geometry is like all those other methods of examining the nature of set logic. It's just a human crafted written language that works
better for some than for others. There's nothing sacred about geometry.
edit on 5/26/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)