Amazing Resonance Experiment!

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by jiggerj

 

I explained in the post right above yours. That was easy.

If you call this an explanation...

The machine was built to mimic what happens naturally...

...then once again, I ask you drop the cheesy grin and understand that some outside force (in this case a human) built the machine...the machine did not build itself...comprendo?

Yeah, I do. Sadly, you don't.

Originally posted by new_here
Although we are veering more and more off topic, and probably will get our posts deleted, I will tell you. I am spirit energy inhabiting a human framework. The spark of life burns within us all. It is a form of energy, and it is who we really are.

Life is not an energy. It requires energy, but there isn't a separate sort of energy called "life". It would be a stretch, but I suppose chemical potential energy (ATP) would be about as close of a match as you could get.

Oh, and as for the other, Jericho is in the Jordan Rift Valley. It's rife with earthquakes. Before a quake, the rock shifts have been known to interfere with the flow of the Jordan river (Joshua 3:13). The damage is consistent with an earthquake. Even the phrase "a great noise" in Hebrew is the same word used for "earthquake". But at any rate, there isn't enough energy in a ram's horn to topple a wall that wouldn't come down in the first stiff breeze. There just isn't.


Garstang, for example, was a Christian biblical archaeologist

The explanation Garstang gives for this massive destruction is an earthquake, and he presents a very plausible case for this being so. Jericho lies on a fault that runs along the west side of the Jordan Valley, and has seen many earthquakes throughout the centuries. The walls of the fourth city fell outward, which would have been the most likely outcome of a quake, and the city's buildings were leveled, the result of a superhuman destructive force. Garstang cites another convincing piece of evidence: the near identicality between a description of disaster in Joshua 3, 16, and two descriptions of earthquakes in later times (1267 CE and 1927 CE). In each account the cliffs above the Jordan River fall into the river and dam it. The striking similarities lead one to believe that the destruction being described in the book of Joshua is the same as that assigned to earthquakes in the other accounts.

reply to post by jiggerj


Obviously, you do not...

I understand the machine did not assemble itself in order to make these patterns.

Therefore, at the very beginning, an outside influence exerted effort.

There was no B without an A.

So do not try to make it seem there is, because there is not.

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by new_here
Although we are veering more and more off topic, and probably will get our posts deleted, I will tell you. I am spirit energy inhabiting a human framework. The spark of life burns within us all. It is a form of energy, and it is who we really are.

Life is not an energy. It requires energy, but there isn't a separate sort of energy called "life". It would be a stretch, but I suppose chemical potential energy (ATP) would be about as close of a match as you could get.

Oh, and as for the other, Jericho is in the Jordan Rift Valley. It's rife with earthquakes. Before a quake, the rock shifts have been known to interfere with the flow of the Jordan river (Joshua 3:13). The damage is consistent with an earthquake. Even the phrase "a great noise" in Hebrew is the same word used for "earthquake". But at any rate, there isn't enough energy in a ram's horn to topple a wall that wouldn't come down in the first stiff breeze. There just isn't.


Garstang, for example, was a Christian biblical archaeologist

The explanation Garstang gives for this massive destruction is an earthquake, and he presents a very plausible case for this being so. Jericho lies on a fault that runs along the west side of the Jordan Valley, and has seen many earthquakes throughout the centuries. The walls of the fourth city fell outward, which would have been the most likely outcome of a quake, and the city's buildings were leveled, the result of a superhuman destructive force. Garstang cites another convincing piece of evidence: the near identicality between a description of disaster in Joshua 3, 16, and two descriptions of earthquakes in later times (1267 CE and 1927 CE). In each account the cliffs above the Jordan River fall into the river and dam it. The striking similarities lead one to believe that the destruction being described in the book of Joshua is the same as that assigned to earthquakes in the other accounts.

edit on 11-6-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)

Well, sometimes it is just not possible to share an inner truth (like about spirit-energy) so on that one I release you to your greater good, as I hope you will me, as well...

On the Jericho thingy you may have a convert, tho. I especially find it interesting that in Hebrew "a great noise" and "earthquake" are the same word!

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by new_here
Anyway, so sorry my truth sparked such concern in you. I mean that. (Because attacking others' beliefs is usually a sign that a person is uncomfortable/not feeling secure in their own belief.)

Oh I see, you are actually a shrink in addition to being a theology expert.

Oh you ol' flatterer... how you do go on!
What I said about people attacking others' beliefs, is really just... common sense, when you stop and think about it. Cause, gosh, you don't even know me. Why else have such a strong reaction to a complete stranger's opposing viewpoint?

Originally posted by new_here
Why else have such a strong reaction to a complete stranger's opposing viewpoint?

Speaking strictly for myself, discussion is what converts ATS from a bus-stop bulletin board with aging, yellowed, bug stained notes pinned on it by passers-by to a forum of ideas.

No discourse, no interest, as far as I'm concerned.

But in a local sense, S&T is a forum where ideas are challenged, preferably in a civil manner. One is often expected to defend one's viewpoint in a rational way, and the place is populated with empiricists such as myself. If you say "I am made of life-energy" I'm going to be tempted to show up and ask you if that's gravitational potential or chemical bond energy since I don't see any evidence (or need for) some speculative unmeasurable unprovable new type of energy that sounds a lot like a religious viewpoint instead of science and technology. If the thread was in one of the less rigorous forums like philosophy I likely wouldn't have asked you the question.

eta: Yeah, "ra'ash" is the same word used in the phrase describing the sound of the shofar at Jericho and for earthquakes. If you google around for "jericho" and "ra'ash" you'll find a number of people discussing it theologically. There's some question if the Israelites were even in the Jordan valley at the time of the fall of Jericho but there's enough ambiguity that it's hard to take a stance.

Originally posted by new_here

So you reminded me of an article I read on a legitimate science website about atoms having 'intelligence.'

I read part of a fascinating book by Isaac Asimov (I forget the title, maybe it was in chronology of the world?) describing the possible origins of life and it involved clays (the geologic material, like sand). Basically, he proposed that before DNA was RNA and before that was diffusion within clay.

I have always wondered where free will came from. If life began with chemical diffusion in clays, did this "life" know what it was doing somehow?

Anyways, resonance is a fascinating subject and I was interested in the topic because of Tesla's possible discovery of using the resonant frequency to shake apart rocks. I worked in mining and tremendous amounts of explosive force is required to break apart the rock while it is still in the earth, but if you could generate a resonant frequency that would cause the rock to shake itself apart, this would save untold amounts of energy worldwide.

As with everything with Tesla, there are only rumors, but this seemed plausible because of the resonant frequency in glass that can cause it to shatter.

Originally posted by intergalactic fire

Maybe its the sound or even music patterns that shapes the whole universe, keeping everything together from falling apart.

I also meant to mention there was some ancient philosophy regarding the "music of the gods" or something similarly named. We could all be resonating to that tune - there are all kinds of mathematical relationships everywhere in nature and music, so who knows?

Originally posted by my1percent
reply to post by new_here

 

When the walls of Jericho were mentioned it reminded me of a program on building bridges that was on tv a little while ago. Apparently when the romans marched in step over bridges they would collapse , so they had to march out of step or whatever. Then the program went on to explain that the millennium bridge in London was swaying because of so many people were walking ( in step?) over it and they had to fix it. Because of the vibrations?

They did a mythbuster's episode on the bridge marching and one on a machine Tesla used for the shaking apart of buildings and that second one had some cool info on resonance.

If I remember right, with Tesla's machine, they were amazed to feel the vibrations of the tiny tapping machine 100 feet away, but stopped the experiment. They claimed it was busted, but it was kind of left up in the air.

reply to post by apcbm4

I really like Asimov- great stories! I've not read the one you mentioned, but now I want to!
And wouldn't we ALL like to get ahold of Tesla's complete works!

Originally posted by apcbm4

Originally posted by intergalactic fire

Maybe its the sound or even music patterns that shapes the whole universe, keeping everything together from falling apart.

I also meant to mention there was some ancient philosophy regarding the "music of the gods" or something similarly named. We could all be resonating to that tune - there are all kinds of mathematical relationships everywhere in nature and music, so who knows?

How exactly do people "resonate"? Sure enough, math is the technique that helps us to model and understand nature and music scales, but how can it be related to "we could all be resonating"?

That's exactly the vague and syrupy stuff that makes New Age so disgusting. I have a ton of "healing crystals" for sale, are you interested? They resonate all right.

Did I just travel back in time or something?

This is old news... at least for me

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by apcbm4

Originally posted by intergalactic fire

Maybe its the sound or even music patterns that shapes the whole universe, keeping everything together from falling apart.

I also meant to mention there was some ancient philosophy regarding the "music of the gods" or something similarly named. We could all be resonating to that tune - there are all kinds of mathematical relationships everywhere in nature and music, so who knows?

How exactly do people "resonate"? Sure enough, math is the technique that helps us to model and understand nature and music scales, but how can it be related to "we could all be resonating"?

That's exactly the vague and syrupy stuff that makes New Age so disgusting. I have a ton of "healing crystals" for sale, are you interested? They resonate all right.

Well sure whatever, but it is interesting nonetheless, how language just happens to use certain words and phrases related to this idea, to describe a given experience.

When something "resonates" with you, you feel good. (Is it vibrating at a certain frequency that is comfortable to you?) You get a good "vibe" from it, eh?

And what about phrases like, "she's got it together" and "she's falling apart." Interesting, when you think about the implications of something resonating, or interfering, with 'her' natural vibratory state of 'togetherness.'

Never really considered that before. Sometimes I just think we know things deep down inside, and outward clues (like slang language) emerge without us realizing how close to literal those seemingly symbolic messages are.

Who knows, really?

reply to post by new_here


That use of words from physics to describe feelings got its start with theosophy, which tried to pitch itself as a science in the 19th century. They intentionally did that to confuse people. There's a decent thread on Blavatsky I've seen the last few days on ATS, she was one of the people that thought that was a great idea.

eta: and no, ideas don't vibrate. Neither do they have a frequency.

.

reply to post by Bedlam


Everything in the universe is energy it has frequency and it vibrates .



E V E R Y T H I N G .
.

Originally posted by R0CR13

Everything in the universe is energy it has frequency and it vibrates .

E V E R Y T H I N G .
.

No, it doesn't.

It's a pseudo-science meme, though, so it's got that going for it. And it's a perfect example of the sort of bs that Blavatsky foisted off on the world. If there is a hell, I hope she's in an especially savage bit of it.

.



and you are apparently obsessed with some disturbed pseudo religious perspective .

So who is in hell really ?

.

reply to post by Bedlam


Actually he's right. Everything is energy vibrating at different frequencies held together by a force. Scientists agree on this but do not know what the force is that binds it all together. Go watch some videos and do some research and you'll see. The video in the OP even has a quote from Tesla stating something along these lines.

Originally posted by Eonnn
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Everything is energy vibrating at different frequencies held together by a force.

a) define "everything"
b) energy is a quantity so it can equate "everything"
c) frequency is also just a quantity

DNA energy field laser frequency vibrations!

The word "frequency" always acts like a red flag to me, as it is for some reason a word woo-woos like a lot, and throw about in absurd ways despite its having a rigid, and not especially thrilling, definition in the scientific world (three others are "energy," "vibration," and "field")

Scientists agree on this

Oh please, I am a scientist and I find this statement so vague and absolute that it does cross into absurd if no outright stupid.

Go watch some videos and do some research and you'll see. The video in the OP even has a quote from Tesla stating something along these lines.

Newsbreak - YouTube is great for "fails of the week", but not really an efficient and accredited source of education, much less a reliable one.

Originally posted by Bedlam
reply to post by new_here

 

That use of words from physics to describe feelings got its start with theosophy, which tried to pitch itself as a science in the 19th century. They intentionally did that to confuse people.

...and one reason that many people apparently fall for it because it is a cheat, a device that allows them to think that they actually know something, a shortcut to perceived comprehension. A person who thought it was too much trouble to get through Physics 101 in college feels cheap satisfaction while pondering how "frequencies" and "energies" all of a sudden explain "resonance" of some "aetheric force-field" in full accordance with "sacred geometry".

And so such stupidity is raging on ATS.