Plasma Tubes Floating Above Earth

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Thank you

Plasma I think could hide the secret of the afterlife.

And yes I think too that Tesla knew very much about plasma.

www.evawaseerst.be...
www.evawaseerst.be... (here two links that plasma can contain subatomic life)

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: chr0naut

A Tokomak is a containment environment for a high energy plasma.

The LHC is a number of accelerators and sensors that collide particles and look at the remnants.

Both are significantly different than each other.

The goal of ITER is to produce a sustainable fusion reaction in a captive plasma with more energy output than input (potentially for energy generation purposes), not to probe the nature of reality as does the LHC.

Your assumption that they are the same is likely the source of your confusion.

As for CERN in these times, let the privateers pay for waving their Bosons about!

They are both containment for high energy particles.
I didn't say they were the same when the purposes are the opposite, I was talking about the containment.
My confusion, is about the huge amount of money involved, and the politics behind that again, and a lack of commonality by way of these bespoke projects, each of which could end up as dead ducks, especially ITER, with $20billion and rising which could end up down the swanee, when there are other fusion projects already ongoing like the National Ignition Facility, Inertial confinement fusion (ICF) which use lasers as a tool for fusion, and are not magnetic confinement instruments.

Al this when much of the world is in austerity economies, with little sign of it ending. It would be great if ITER worked in ten years time, but still it would be decades before something came on line. If the laser guys are ahead though?

Big science relies on big investment and we need the big science because all the low budget stuff can only go so far.

Big is right, and the scientists get to eat cake as well.
Anyone of course would be a fool not to invest, however our greatest need, right now, is a cheaper and extremely efficient energy source. The LHC is not into that so I say, let the weekenders play with it, and let my money go on the fusion systems. I've had enough of lofty scientific waffle.

Is the 6th page deep enough in the thread to post the actual research paper in full? (PDF): Real-time imaging of density ducts between the plasmasphere and ionosphere

Further reading: whist ler-mode waves

Yes, I'm a nerd.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Good on her! Turning an array into 3-D is very fitting for a young mind.

Plasma tubes eh? Wonder what they be good for?

Energy harvesting perhaps?

Or..another question might be 'what harm can they do...?'

For example...the tubes are reported to be generally 600km up, inside the ionosphere, but also reaching the ground (and areas of the sea) following the magnetic field lines of the planet...could an aircraft be destroyed if it came to close to where one of these tubes emanate or touch down?

Could an aircraft interacting or intersecting these ionised plasma tubes suffer a communications failure, and effectively disappear...like MH370 and many other disappearances, such as the infamous Bermuda triangle (and various others on earth)?

For example...the tubes are reported to be generally 600km up, inside the ionosphere, but also reaching the ground (and areas of the sea) following the magnetic field lines of the planet...could an aircraft be destroyed if it came to close to where one of these tubes emanate or touch down?

Could an aircraft interacting or intersecting these ionised plasma tubes suffer a communications failure, and effectively disappear...like MH370 and many other disappearances, such as the infamous Bermuda triangle (and various others on earth)?

Scientists do report these plasma tubes interfering with GPS and satellite systems, and according to the research electrons are said to be riding these huge plasma tubes, and that one of the means for observing them is by radio waves, so it does seem possible that an aircraft caught up in something like this is going to experience some issues. Then again lightening can hit a plane and still not destroy it, so it's hard to say.

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

So cool in so many ways. Thanks. F&S&

btw - Found 1 other discovery of great interest to me today, and seems to me this and that's related in a fractal kind of way. A direct physical pathway between the immune system and the brain

Very cool discovery. Done by someone who hadn't yet succumbed to the pressure of conformity in the scientific world.

I notice the toroidal shape which is a common energy vortex shape in nature.

Any controversy surrounding this discovery yet?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Very cool discovery. Done by someone who hadn't yet succumbed to the pressure of conformity in the scientific world.

Really X from the linked article

For over 60 years, scientists believed these structures existed

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Very cool discovery. Done by someone who hadn't yet succumbed to the pressure of conformity in the scientific world

As hard as it is to comprehend for you, a lot of the progress of our knowledge and even some revolutionary develpments happen within the mainstream circles, thanks to their rigorous application of the scientific method, and the foundation of all the scientific knowledge accumulated in the last few hundreds of years.

Have the non-mainstream/pseudoscience/metaphysical "experts" ever given anything useful to the humanity?

We dont understand what these plasma tubes are really for nor how they are formed. Just the tip of the iceberg we dont really know jack squat about the earth. We still dont know how fast we are moving in space time, or how there is an electron shield around the earth.

To be honest 1/4th of Americans dont know the earth goes around the sun. . . .

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Very cool discovery. Done by someone who hadn't yet succumbed to the pressure of conformity in the scientific world.

Really X from the linked article

For over 60 years, scientists believed these structures existed

Yes, believed they existed but hadn't yet discovered them like thousands of theories out there. I would also bet large that any scientists putting their name to the belief these structures existed were not in positions of power or authority, though my faith in humanity would be fractionally restored if you were to prove me wrong.

originally posted by: wildespace

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Very cool discovery. Done by someone who hadn't yet succumbed to the pressure of conformity in the scientific world

As hard as it is to comprehend for you, a lot of the progress of our knowledge and even some revolutionary develpments happen within the mainstream circles, thanks to their rigorous application of the scientific method, and the foundation of all the scientific knowledge accumulated in the last few hundreds of years.

Have the non-mainstream/pseudoscience/metaphysical "experts" ever given anything useful to the humanity?

I love posts like this because their premises are such an easy task to disprove.

It is common knowledge in the scientific community that most scientific breakthroughs were initially rejected by mainstream science and often only proven by scientists willing to sacrifice their careers, money and reputations to prove what they knew was correct. And it is even worse today in the era of pervasive corporate funding of academic institutions and many scientist more concerned with reputation, status, power, funding and paying their mortgages than investigating anomalies; thank goodness not all are like that.

It is a FACT that most scientific breakthroughs were at one time considered to be only the purview of "looney" scientists.





Link

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

And yet those breakthroughs or advances were confirmed or brought to life in the scientific way, by the mainstream scientists. If it works, science discovers it; if it doesn't, it remains the arena of pseudoscience and speculation (like Nibiru).

What you wrote about scientists being motivated by power or money is your personal opinion and can also be disproven.

It is faulty logic to state that, because many important discoveries or advances were initially ridiculed in the scientific circles, modern ideas or speculations that are being ridiculed by scientists must be valid.

originally posted by: wildespace
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

And yet those breakthroughs or advances were confirmed or brought to life in the scientific way, by the mainstream scientists. If it works, science discovers it; if it doesn't, it remains the arena of pseudoscience and speculation (like Nibiru).

What you wrote about scientists being motivated by power or money is your personal opinion and can also be disproven.

It is faulty logic to state that, because many important discoveries or advances were initially ridiculed in the scientific circles, modern ideas or speculations that are being ridiculed by scientists must be valid.

I never said anything negative about the scientific method, it works.

I just said many initial anomalies that eventually led to breakthroughs in science have been ignored or explained away at first as they threatened the established order, mainstream science often ignored the scientific method and did not pursue anomalies, though such anomalies often lead to a scientific breakthrough. This is fact and just human nature so I don't know why you are getting you undergarments in such a bunch; it is also why good scientists guard against bias especially confirmation bias.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: wildespace
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

And yet those breakthroughs or advances were confirmed or brought to life in the scientific way, by the mainstream scientists. If it works, science discovers it; if it doesn't, it remains the arena of pseudoscience and speculation (like Nibiru).

What you wrote about scientists being motivated by power or money is your personal opinion and can also be disproven.

It is faulty logic to state that, because many important discoveries or advances were initially ridiculed in the scientific circles, modern ideas or speculations that are being ridiculed by scientists must be valid.

I never said anything negative about the scientific method, it works.

I just said many initial anomalies that eventually led to breakthroughs in science have been ignored or explained away at first as they threatened the established order, mainstream science often ignored the scientific method and did not pursue anomalies, though such anomalies often lead to a scientific breakthrough. This is fact and just human nature so I don't know why you are getting you undergarments in such a bunch; it is also why good scientists guard against bias especially confirmation bias.

So what was your comment about not succumbing to the pressure of conformity about? The subject of this thread was part of the mainstream science all along, so our discussion seems to have gone off on a tangent. You don't see much point in my comments, I don't see much point in yours.

The bottom line is that in the recent decades some amazing science has been done in the mainstream circles, and it just keeps coming. I'd take that over self-appointed "experts" or "visionaries" like Hoagland or Leider any day.

Once again, being ridiculed by the academia doesn't give an idea or theory more credence.

a reply to: wildespace

If you think there is no pressure to succumb to conformity in academia, especially when funding is disproportionately corporate or governmental, I think you are naïve.

So this group and many others like it exist because the pressure in science to conform to 3rd party interests isn't a problem?

The Integrity in Science (ISS) Project combats corporate influence on science and science-based public policy. We scrutinize more than 200 science-based federal advisory committees for undisclosed conflicts of interest, monitor the media and scientific literature for failure to disclose, and encourage the adoption of strong disclosure policies. ISS publishes the weekly Integrity in Science Watch e-Newsletter and maintains an open database of public records of scientists' ties to industry.

Integrity in Science

I'm sorry but I'm done, you choose to ignore facts and history - I can't be bothered to waste any more time.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
And I still don't see the point of your first post in this thread, or how your subsequent posts apply to the subject being discussed. I guess you're unable to add anything to the discussion other than keep repeating that there's an ingrained opposition to new and revolutionary ideas (not true) and implying that this gives credence to any non-mainstream ideas (also not true).