Topic: Light Does Not Travel | |
---|---|
If you get deeply into quantum physics you can probably prove that nothing exists. That is where you are faced with only consciousness. That is all that truly exists. while i do not totally disbelieve that, i think it is your mind, or consciousness that proves everything exists, not that nothing exists..i think there is a big difference. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sun 06/05/11 02:35 PM
|
|
I keep thinking that I should be able to shape shift, travel via teleportation, fly through the air, become invisible at will, and various other somewhat "magical" things if I knew how all of it really worked.
|
|
|
|
If you get deeply into quantum physics you can probably prove that nothing exists. That is where you are faced with only consciousness. That is all that truly exists. while i do not totally disbelieve that, i think it is your mind, or consciousness that proves everything exists, not that nothing exists..i think there is a big difference. Yes, as long as you define "existence" as something you can interact with. I guess we decide what exists, and we decide if something is proof or not. |
|
|
|
I keep thinking that I should be able to shape shift, travel via teleportation, fly through the air, become invisible at will, and various other somewhat "magical" things if I knew how all of it really worked. Many scientists have these dreams and explore scientific methods, such as a glider. Some spiritualists claim to levitate or various other things out of body. We tend to create our own limitations and reality. "Magic" is possible in our dreams. Too many people "grow up" and quit dreaming. |
|
|
|
I keep thinking that I should be able to shape shift, travel via teleportation, fly through the air, become invisible at will, and various other somewhat "magical" things if I knew how all of it really worked. Many scientists have these dreams and explore scientific methods, such as a glider. Some spiritualists claim to levitate or various other things out of body. We tend to create our own limitations and reality. "Magic" is possible in our dreams. Too many people "grow up" and quit dreaming. Well I have done some out of body stuff, and being in two places at once, but it was in an astral or invisible form. I would like to learn to become more physical and be seen. I heard of a student who was never absent from class. He was an A student. One day his mother received a call from the school asking why he left school that day. His mother said that he never went to school, that he has been home sick in bed all day. He has been sound asleep. Both the teacher and the principle did not believe her. They had seen him at school. He walked into class and asked the teacher for his homework assignment and left. He did not remember doing it. |
|
|
|
The speed of light was measured accurately back in 1887.
http://www.aip.org/history/gap/Michelson/01_Michelson.html |
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sun 06/05/11 06:40 PM
|
|
The speed of light was measured accurately back in 1887. http://www.aip.org/history/gap/Michelson/01_Michelson.html How would you know that it was "accurate?" Apparently the number has changed quite a few times. I think the "speed" we are measuring is of course relative to our own movements and other movements of things in relation to each other. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sun 06/05/11 06:44 PM
|
|
Here is some information about Walter Russel who wrote the book "The secret of Light"
http://www.dowsers.com/page2.html "The official scientific community considered Walter Russell to be a heretic because he approached science from a metaphysical viewpoint, putting God into the equation. However, at least two scientists have since won Nobel Prizes by developing his ideas. Walter Russell never was given credit for the discoveries he revealed to mankind in 1926, in his scientific treatise, The Universal One." |
|
|
|
Would you say that time does not travel either?
|
|
|
|
The speed of light was measured accurately back in 1887. http://www.aip.org/history/gap/Michelson/01_Michelson.html How would you know that it was "accurate?" Apparently the number has changed quite a few times. I think the "speed" we are measuring is of course relative to our own movements and other movements of things in relation to each other. Light travels and it's speed can be measured. I think the general scientific community views Russell's opinion on the nature of light to be pretty much bunk. There is no reason to discard numerous scientific measurements which are all very explanatory, reproducible and predictive simply because someone has another interpretation which is not. |
|
|
|
Would you say that time does not travel either? Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 06/06/11 09:26 AM
|
|
The speed of light was measured accurately back in 1887. http://www.aip.org/history/gap/Michelson/01_Michelson.html How would you know that it was "accurate?" Apparently the number has changed quite a few times. I think the "speed" we are measuring is of course relative to our own movements and other movements of things in relation to each other. Light travels and it's speed can be measured. I think the general scientific community views Russell's opinion on the nature of light to be pretty much bunk. There is no reason to discard numerous scientific measurements which are all very explanatory, reproducible and predictive simply because someone has another interpretation which is not. I know what the "general" views of the scientific community are of Russell's views, that's why I mentioned them. That does not change a thing unless you are a die hard scientific defender. These facts go way beyond observable scientific methods and address the truth via quantum physics. Light only appears to travel because of time and space, which everyone knows does not really exist. If you really think about it, and if you can get past this illusion of reality that we call space-time, he is talking about the true nature of light. Evidence of the quantum nature actually points to the idea that this reality is just a holographic in nature. Shocking, I know. But eventually everyone will know this stuff, even the scientific community. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 06/06/11 09:23 AM
|
|
Would you say that time does not travel either? In the true reality, time does not exist. (This reality is simulated.) Time is linked with space which is linked with matter. MEST (Matter, energy, space and time) are one thing. One does not exist without the other. All are simply energy. |
|
|
|
Would you say that time does not travel either? In the true reality, time does not exist. (This reality is simulated.) Time is linked with space which is linked with matter. MEST (Matter, energy, space and time) are one thing. One does not exist without the other. All are simply energy. That makes relative sense. |
|
|
|
Would you say that time does not travel either? In the true reality, time does not exist. (This reality is simulated.) Time is linked with space which is linked with matter. MEST (Matter, energy, space and time) are one thing. One does not exist without the other. All are simply energy. time has never existed, and never will- it is just a perception... |
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 06/06/11 12:02 PM
|
|
Would you say that time does not travel either? In the true reality, time does not exist. (This reality is simulated.) Time is linked with space which is linked with matter. MEST (Matter, energy, space and time) are one thing. One does not exist without the other. All are simply energy. time has never existed, and never will- it is just a perception... This would also mean, if time does not exist, then light can have no speed. There are no "light years." Inside of this simulated reality of MEST these things are simply all perceptions of the mind. That's the first Hermetic Law. "THE ALL is MIND; The Universe is Mental." -The Kybalion 1. The Law of Mentalism: The Universe is mental. We exist in the mind of the All. That part of us which is deity makes up the world and everything in it. ''The All Is Mind; The Universe Is Mental.'' I have always called it The Universal Mind. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Bushidobillyclub
on
Mon 06/06/11 01:23 PM
|
|
Sure, you could describe light as individual photons, and that each photon moving through the electromagnetic spectrum excites the field as it travels, loses energy as it does so, and its the next unit of EM field that actually absorbs the previous photons energy and emits a photon of slightly lower energy that then travels onward. Seems to me like a lot of work for no apparent gain.
However if you describe light as a wave, the wave does move, even if individual photons are destroyed/created as they interact with the EM field. Its about the description really. |
|
|
|
The speed of light was measured accurately back in 1887. http://www.aip.org/history/gap/Michelson/01_Michelson.html How would you know that it was "accurate?" Apparently the number has changed quite a few times. I think the "speed" we are measuring is of course relative to our own movements and other movements of things in relation to each other. Light travels and it's speed can be measured. I think the general scientific community views Russell's opinion on the nature of light to be pretty much bunk. There is no reason to discard numerous scientific measurements which are all very explanatory, reproducible and predictive simply because someone has another interpretation which is not. That was before 25 cent beer night at the stadium was invented. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The speed of light was measured accurately back in 1887. http://www.aip.org/history/gap/Michelson/01_Michelson.html How would you know that it was "accurate?" Apparently the number has changed quite a few times. I think the "speed" we are measuring is of course relative to our own movements and other movements of things in relation to each other. Light travels and it's speed can be measured. I think the general scientific community views Russell's opinion on the nature of light to be pretty much bunk. There is no reason to discard numerous scientific measurements which are all very explanatory, reproducible and predictive simply because someone has another interpretation which is not. I know what the "general" views of the scientific community are of Russell's views, that's why I mentioned them. That does not change a thing unless you are a die hard scientific defender. These facts go way beyond observable scientific methods and address the truth via quantum physics. Light only appears to travel because of time and space, which everyone knows does not really exist. If you really think about it, and if you can get past this illusion of reality that we call space-time, he is talking about the true nature of light. Evidence of the quantum nature actually points to the idea that this reality is just a holographic in nature. Shocking, I know. But eventually everyone will know this stuff, even the scientific community. Or possibly the scientific community is right and Russell's view of light is really bunk. |
|
|