I agree. RIP Wal Thornhill.

a giant? a man who knew nothing, understood nothing, contributed nothing? he was an ace grifter, though, I can see why MF would admire him...

Charming as ever. I found Wal to be a brilliant guy, generous with his time and clearly a believer in what he preached, whether it turns out he was right or wrong in the end (we both know he was right though). He also left behind a beautiful family who loved him. In the end, you two didn't agree about space. Big deal. Even if you can't be a decent scientist, couldn't you at least try to be a decent human? Happy New Year. I appreciate you always trying to save us from thinking about stuff. Can't wait to see you in the next one.@@user-ph2ql2vg1d

@@user-ph2ql2vg1d you give people called 'User' a bad name, you should be disgusted with yourself

😂

You are so fortunate to be grasping these ideas at 32! I'm 61 years young and just now getting it . . .

@@joannego856 Thank you, and you leaving this comment has reminded me I needed to watch this again so thank you again. You know I find that people who stop trying to learn because they think they are at the top, usually are at a comfortable height and will tell others there is no more to go. Because of that I say to myself Happiness is maintained not obtained

I think you mistake ignorance (inability to answer) for a personal vested interest in an established career that might be destroyed if everything they believe is washed away. Arp found out exactly what that was like.

You are on the right track and jimb is also right. Newton's first contribution was shunned by the scientific community because denied a renowned scientist his work. Today we follow newton's work which was his definition of what light is. In simple, different frequency. You may have crystallized intelligence which grows with knowledge and experience. You are right too because there are some people who will never be able to rationalize complex concepts. Hence IQs

I really like this comment can you see my comment at the top of the threads??

@@phillipbrewster969 yes, ' science' and government always standing in the way of progress.

liar

You can induce electricity from one conductor (powered) into another conductor (unpowered) through an insulator. Like if you have a ton of of high voltage cables together, even if only one has "power" running through it the other ones still absorb power from the live wire and can kill you. Even through the insulation. But with AC power only. It's because AC power switches between current and voltage depending on the circumstances. Also you need an oscillating magnetic field to induce electricity. It cannot be static. The nail you touched wasn't absorbing voltage but absorbing the fluctuating magnetic field from a fluctuating current that converted back to voltage once it was back inside a conductor. " An oscillating magnetic field (current) will produce an oscillating electric field (voltage). What Thornhill is talking about is equalizing potential between two bodies. Like static buildup from socks on a carpet. You build up a charge, so say your environment is +1 charged for simplicity. When you build up the static and now you're +3. When that +3 field meets the +1 they want to be equal. So you will discharge +1 to the doorknob let's say, and both have +2. Equal potential. So when two bodies in space meet (theoretically) the one with the greater charge can discharge towards the one that has less. This is a very sound theory and is 100% factual when it comes to charges. They want to equal out, ALWAYS. Say a rogue planet drifts into our solar system and passes near enough to something of a different charge, it could definitely arc across. If all the conditions are met. The vacuum of space isn't a very good conductor lol. So they would have to be very large charges. But we know interstellar space has a much higher potential than inside the heliosphere. So anything out there would come in and discharge towards whatever is here. All in theory. But that's the difference between what you experienced and what he's talking about. It's kinda of the same because your still receiving a shock for being at a different potential. But it's not the phenomenon he's talking about.

Brilliant

thank god for you. teach all you can to anyone who will listen.

filthywishdragon oh, thank you ! I put together a series of classes for our local city continuing education program .. waiting on approval now for fall semester .. wish me luck :)

***** This new series in my local community would be the first time, but I have given single sessions on electrogravity a few times now.

***** Thanks iFramed .. Best part of it is that it forces me to even better understand it myself, in order to be able to teach it !

Yes! If you look into a fellow named John Taylor Gatto, he wrote several books about this. I believe he passed away some time ago. He was named the New York City school teacher of the year several times and really did not embrace the regular school method so to speak. Very interesting fellow one of the books is called dumbing us down.

Of course. It's called a Prussian Factory School model. Now it's run by marxists.

David Shelton The facts tell the tale? Lol. Any time anyone says that you know they’re unaware of logic and reasoning skills. You might have memorized math concepts well but “facts” don’t tell tales, our interpretation of facts do. If you think facts tell tales that means you’re just employing intuition, which is as good as a guess. We know our physics is wrong, that’s as apparent as anything in life, you can call it “inaccurate” if you want but if something is inaccurate especially in math it’s wrong in the real world, so why are you so hostile towards people exploring alternative areas?

tenurb78 Philosophy logical fallacy and classical science will free you of some of the subservient brainwashing schools employ. The negative is you realize just how much we don’t know, the positive is you won’t go around parroting math equations being positive you’re right about nonsense.

@@davidshelton1898 you're absolutely right. I am pretty perturbed by the army of morons this sort of thing breeds

I absolutely love this. This also explains why the earth is a spherical shape.

Indeed Dave Talbott and Wal Thornhill are two men who are truly stargazers and who will be thanked by students/teachers now and in the future.

Is this one of those things where people feel special that they think they know something that others don’t? Kind of like the flat earth community?

SAME! It's freakin' awesome! As it turnsout, everything was wrong or lies. Everything, even down to gravity. (Punny!) BUT, there's a lesson to take forward into the next 12k Solar cycle: be very careful of incentives and ethical consistency. The foundation of our society is a contradiction at its core: gov't must violate the things that we want it to protect. It must steal but it must protect property. It must kill but protect life, etc. This contradiction is carried forward to everything. The more it perpetuates society's problems, the more money we give it to solve the problems. This has spiraled into a backward world based on lies and misdirection. A few of us get a firehose drink of truth before the Sun goes micronova, so we can carry these lessons forward to build the next society without the flaws of the old one.

_everything I learned in school again from a completely different perspective._ Idiot

Because everything we learned in school, we have been taught for a reason, and it was not in our interest.

+TrueDAN Great idea! Yeah I'd say we do a public service to other people's cognition when we present all the phenomena which don't fit with a current belief. Helps people become more unattached to the ideas of a moment, and inspires them to prefer the excitement of new epiphanies over the security of preconceptions. : )

I disagree respectfully. I feel like that sometimes, but then I remember that my time scale is nothing compared to that of history. Lets realize we used to have a very different financial architectures, as well as a very different cosmology and all sort of big and important things change dramatically multiple times over time scales that can make us perceive them as inmutable, but they aren’t. May be we are not going to see the next scientific revolution but certainly we are participating the the current industrial revolution and perhaps (I wish) we get to see the end of some old political theories and the rise of new ones

I reckon he missed the subtle hint

@@WorksopGimp since there is electricity in space, we do not have to take or make unlimited fuel to travel

@@WorksopGimp J P Morgan?.

If it wasn't for the free market restoring carbon to the carbon cycle, plants, the base of the food chain, would probably have suffocated by now. CO2 was dangerously low. Like everything else politicized, the truth is the opposite of the propaganda. (Imagine if we weren't using fossil fuels and we discover that plants are dying and need the trapped carbon restored as CO2, and *we have to rely on gov't to extract and burn it off.* We'd be screwed. Lol.)

He`s one of my favorite as well.

Please, let me be first to be enlightened. I've always wanted to know, if I drop a pencil from a height of 1 meter, how long will it take to fall to the ground? If you know the answer please let me know too!

Why don't you time it dumbass

That's exactly what I love, reasoned argument. Thank for so eloquently proving my point, bye.

Would you mind sharing a link please?

Yes of course Kezz. The main site is Thunderbolts (dot) info or there are various FB groups like 'Electric Cosmology' or 'thunderbolts.project' who are all independents but all part of the community which is rather quite large now.

+Phil Francis Thanks very much Phil I'll definitely check out those spots. I was actually wondering specifically about the Safire Project you mentioned though? You said it's on the way and I was wondering where to watch for it. Is it a presentation from the conference that will show up on this channel, or should I look for it somewhere else?

+Phil Francis P.S. Just joined that FB group and I see you're the admin. I look forward to participating!

no

Your post was 3 years ago as of this post, but I'll post this anyway for possibly you and/or some other reader to see. It's my own Theory Of Everything idea along with a test for what I believe 'gravity' truly is. The gravity test needs to be done to prove or disprove that portion of the TOE idea and the gravity test will speak for itself. It will either be true, or at least partly true, or it will be wrong. Either way, science moves forward. (Copy and pastes from my files): Revised TOE: 3/25/2017a. My Current TOE: THE SETUP: 1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism. 2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.). 3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them. 4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them. 5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them. FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO: 6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field. 7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field. 8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality. 9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons. 10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary. 11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks. 12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do. THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA: 13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". It's the force that makes the sine wave of EM energy go from a wide (maximum extension) to a point (minimum extension) of a moving photon and acts 90 degrees to the EM forces which act 90 degrees to each other. When the EM gets to maximum extension, "gravity" flips and EM goes to minimum, then "gravity" flips and goes back to maximum, etc, etc. A stationary photon would pulse from it's maximum extension to a point possibly even too small to detect, then back to maximum, etc, etc. 14. I also believe that a pulsating, swirling singularity (which is basically a pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon) is the energy unit in this universe. 15. When these pulsating, swirling energy units interact with other energy units, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe. 16. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate. 17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure. 18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons). THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY: 19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up. 20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency. 21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies. NOTES: 22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well. 25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true. 26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught? DISCLAIMER: 27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty. * And a side note, 7/1/2019, (update to item #26 above in the TOE): The universe itself is probably not expanding, in other words 'space' is not expanding. The net effect of solar winds, particles and energy pushing outward from galaxies, and other galaxies doing the same, continuously, over a prolonged period of time, would tend to push galaxies away from each other if nothing stopped them from doing so. It would give the illusion of 'space' expanding, but 'space' would not really be expanding. Then, as galaxies moved about, the net effect between the galaxies could change the interactions and possibly allow galaxies to collide at times. Also, the interactions between galaxies might cause some of the particles in some galaxies to start to rotate about that galactic's center, and along with gravity acting upon those particles from that galactic gravitational center, would cause the galaxy to become spiral shaped and shrink in size. Those on a planet in a solar system in a spiral shaped galaxy would perceive the rest of the universe expanding, also an illusion though. And combined with galaxies pushing away from each other, would give the illusion of space expanding faster and faster, but it would not really be. And also: 1. What exactly is 'space' that it can expand? 2. Where did the extra energy come from to cause space to expand? (Science claims energy cannot be created nor destroyed, one of the foundations of physics). 3. How exactly would 'light' ('em') look from far away galaxies if 'space' itself were expanding? 4. If gravity waves truly existed and were moving through the universe that had space itself expanding, how also would the 'em' look from far away galaxies? 5. And while we are on it, what exactly is 'gravity' that LIGO detected it? And wouldn't the detectors be affected by that gravity wave going through space at the same time the laser's 'em' were effected? Of which also, takes us back up top. Do my gravity test to try to discern what 'gravity' might truly be. ______________________________________________________________________________ Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way. a. Imagine a 12 hour clock. b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions. c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions. (The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.) d. Shoot a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields. e. Do this with the em fields on and off. (The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results.) f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects. (Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.) (An alternative to the above would be to shoot 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space.) 'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done. 'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. Science still wins either way and moves forward.

Note also: "IF" numbers themselves don't exist by this or by some similar means, then ask people how numbers themselves actually exist for math to do what math supposedly does in this universe: (Copy and paste from my files): 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have).

@@davidwaynechoate8059 "IF" my gravity test gets done and shows what I currently believe it will show, then 'light' makes up 'solid matter' too.

@@charlesbrightman4237 I am unable to copy and paste this on my phone, and wonder if you could forward a copy. I have been unable to have a conversation on this granular level with anyone for the past 35 years, and I believe we are both focused on primary causation at the most essential level. I will look forward to being able to make a hard copy for more extended consideration. Thanks for posting it.

Real physics! Yes🥰

It's a degree of nonsense......nowhere have I found their own "simple" math model that arrives at g (or an "electric force" equivalent to g)=9.8m/s^2 oft used in simple Newtonian mechanics that they oh so worship to be the original functional model that had hints at "accounting for electric forces". Math is a tool and there can be math that doesn't check out, but that doesn't mean to just dance around with a lot of words and come up with no proper measurements and formulations at all.

That'd sad

+steve nunua Is the statement that a definite truth does not exists a statement of definite truth ? If you say it's not, then why should I believe your statement in the first place ? If it's not definite truth that there is no definite truth then I find no reason to believe that it is true, so the statement that a definite truth does not exist defeats itself and should be discarded as unreasonable.

Hmm

steve nunua That sounds like non sense to not believe in anything ever, which thankfully has no bearing on reality for it has definite truth that you can believe in otherwise we wouldn't have cars, airplanes and all the modern comforts you can buy because this stuff didn't exist before someone made it and that someone had to believe it was possible to create it. The Wright brothers believed they could fly and man if they'd listen to you then we would not have airplanes today. The definite truth is out there and we use it plenty.

+Sig Ra, True enough although if Henry Ford would have run his gas engine in a closed shop without any ventilation he would not have been around long enough to start the Ford motor company. Yes there has been and is much technology going on although much of it is dependent on making money/profits with little or no concern about the consequences, for the sake of our children`s future we need to do better.

It's "brilliant" to an imbecile. Furthermore, the "work" is neither "groundbreaking" or "historic".

@@Consrignrant and, or, neither, nor. Makes sense from someone calling names.

@@michaelwaxter3372.......... Ah yes, the "calling names" reply. Aren't you clever.

@@Consrignrant yeah. Just pointing out it has more weight when you use correct grammer.

Wal Thornhill does an excellent job in explaining how gravity works in his talk (The long path to understanding gravity) thunderbolts 2015 conference. P.S. For those of you who are interested in knowing your true history and thereby a better understanding of yourselves stick with the thunderbolts folks and the conversation your reading comments about. P.S.S. The talk Dave Talbott did on (Exposing the myths of settled science) and the DVD (Remembering the End of the World) are both excellent!

James Kenyon When gravity is truly understood it will replace the imagination of Einstein with reality.

francesco tammaro Yes indeed, and when I drop a plate of spaghetti on a floor I have to clean it up or perhaps if I`m to little my mom, however that is really where I am and I`m living the experience. We live in a 3 dimensional electric powered universe filled with plasma i.e, solids, liquids and gasses before they are solidified, liquefied, and or turned into gasses. Einstein introduced time as a dimension back in the 1930`s time which is not physical in any way, or form. The idea of being able to go back in time would mean unwinding the entire universe because its all connected. Time is motion measured nothing more and right now I`m enjoying a conversation with folks around the world who share a common thread of wanting to know about themselves and the universe they live in, thanks Francesco, fellow student, James

francesco tammaro I believe Einstein said something very similar to that.

francesco tammaro or perhaps that was Mark Twain...

+E. Lectricity Yup, E.L. I like the confidence he presents, too. Pure frustration with ‘Railroaded Science’ from Wal and a lot of people. Namaste and care, mhikl

+E. Lectricity I noticed that swagger . It comes from being right all the time.

This idiot proved nothing. He did NOTHING to prove that his EU bullshit is in any way "better" theory than what we already about the universe.

It is unfortunate that he has to spend most of his time pointing out the clear logical flaws in dogmatic contemporary sophistry.

Wal is an OG

My discomfort always revolved around red shift as a proxy for distance. If one were to statistically evaluate the probability of all those celestial objects that are in recession vs those approaching, red shift, and by extension, expansion of space would have been abandoned long ago as an impossibility. A random motion universe with no center cannot behave in that manner.

@@jimb4090 If you consider space had a uniform mass distribution, it would all cancel out except for the star that created the photon, so that star has the most (only) gravitation influence on that particle, FOREVER. therefore, some of the observed Red Shift is the result of its home stars' gravitation field, and the red shift is solely caused by gravity of that star and not an expanding universe. Also, Halton Arp was the greatest scientist on modern times.

Like all EU fanatics, you never bothered to understand proved physics, because mastering proved physics is incredibly difficult, requires years of labor and practice, doing thousands of homework exercises. So, instead of acting logically, you PRE-CHOOSE the EU bullshit, then cherrypick only that data that you think fits with EU. You EU extremists absolutely NEVER do ANY self-criticism of your ideas, NEVER try to prove your EU model wrong. That is what REAL scientists & mathematicians do.

@@theultimatereductionist7592 please write at least once, what particular acronym means. EU for me is Euro.Union. I can fit meanings 'expanding universe' but I can be sure.. ;-)

RE-cognize

That's what they want,to make things so complicated that morons like us have to turn to them. They can't get any predictions right and they make shit up on the fly to suit their needs. Even a moron should know that that is not science. To admit that they're wrong or even could be, is beyond their great intellect. And they wouldn't be the experts slash, no it all, geniuses that we need and rely on. They would lose power. Their books wouldn't sell. If they don't like the data they ignore it. That's easy. I can ignore them. I learned from the best.

@@theultimatereductionist7592 and neither do they. How does a star make heavier and heavier elements at it's core. It would choke out. Heavier elements don't sit on top of lighter ones and wait their turn to be converted. And a zillion other nonsensical solutions to the models which never work. They can't even find convection on the sun with every detector we can provide including MRI oh we just need to spend more money. And... You buy it. Because you were told by someone who couldn't careless or is just like you. Mistaught. And you can't break the chain. I'm not impressed.

Ibrahim Kaya not sure about simulation maybe simulation relies too much on mathematics alone, perhaps a simple experiment, i do believe there was a short video of one experiment conducted in this presentation, there was also some mathematical equations before that. so i would say no its not just talk, but you know if you like you can fund these guys so that they can go and do the experiment. or alternatively think of an experiment that may contradict your own belief systems. its not about Who is wrong but What is wrong. ironically this whole presentation is providing some clues to the issues and problems of current big bang/black hole science in other words addressing the problems, also known as real science.

shaun smit i think he just chooses to be ignorant

+Ibrahim Kaya i think he may have more to give as the thought process develops. watch youtube: "the primer fields" parts 1-2 by david lapoint.

+shaun smit mojority are from electric scarring.

+Joe Stitz Be careful of primer field references. The experiments you're referring to use magnets that are not monopole.

Hi Naimul Haq, I gave my impression of Wallace Thornhill and what has done The work is his. I believe in much of his work, but not necessarily all of it. I am not a spokesman or representative for Wal Thornhill though. So, please, watch the video above and research his thoughts. Perhaps, you could then address your questions about his theory to him? Cheers

Well, quite frankly, I get that same impression about your comments. But, perhaps you know better?

You do not appear to have any real knowledge of EU Theory and have done no real research of your own on the topic. Typical copycat Trolling. Quoting a famous dismissive quote shows where you come from. If you seemed sincere I might have made an effort. But, your mind is clearly closed. For the record: The symbolic language tool known as equations only have meaning when they are based on observable testable assumptions. If you knew anything at all about EU, you'd know that "It's all about the evidence." Try actually reading the material itself sometime It might broaden your knowledge and make your comments seem less foolish?

Alright Kalum Batsch, That is enough trolling of my comments! I have no objection to your being a cynic, but I do object to you seeming to troll my comments. The evidence, logic and real scientific reasoning is plentiful and forthcoming from both Wallace Thornhill and Stephen J. Crothers just to name two. But, I suspect that you would have already found the proof for these alternative theories of the Universe if you were really interested in learning new things. The "old guard" typically, and foolishly, tends to fights tooth and nail to preserve their own theoretical templates no matter how illogical and shaky the foundation of their cherished theories may in fact be. Demonstrable proof is the basis of any true science. Stop asking me to spoon feed you information that you can obtain for yourself. Or, go ask Thornhill and Crothers, or the many other Electric Universe theorists and researchers for yourself Find the evidence for yourself!I stated my opinion in my comment. That was all I did. Okay? And, when I say you should do your own research I don't mean that to include your reading other people's editorializing and just taking their opinions as your own. When you allow others do the work for you, they are apt to give you their slant on things and lead you astray. Think and learn for yourself using your critical mind. Take nothing but God on faith, question everything else. Regards,

Okay, I called it right. You are just trolling my comments. If folks don't want your simplified version in "Twitter Form" they can easily find the the original more thoughtful attacks with a simple Google search. I'm not here to argue or try to reach closed minds. In my opinion all in all the Electric Universe Theory is far more valid and scientific than conventional Cosmological theory. However, like any theory it makes assumptions. If you actually followed the research you might know just how often these assertions have turned out to be predictively correct though. But, I'm wrong to be responding to a person who trolls other people's comments. So, I'm being foolish to even try and have a conversation here. In any case now that you've had your "rhetorical orgasm," kindly leave me out of the rest of your Internet life experience. Arguing with you just doesn't do it for me, dude. Peace ;)

Gold

Finally, someone asking an intelligent question, rather than just blindly believing this nonsense

Could i see your results so far? Is there a way to see what you developed cause i have a theory too.

What…evolve? This isn’t Pokémon 😂

Yes, I came to that conclusion as well. But there's probably some way of conceptualising it that avoids the circularity we both observe.

+ AntiFed1791 Me too!

Gyro creates no vacuum.

Creates no wind really either. Very weak if any. Go buy one off ebay or amazon.com

He's just claiming things are nonsense and providing no reasoning

The choice 100 years ago was simple. Support the industrial revolution and maximize investment returns or be destroyed financially. Today it’s not much different. Support the work of funded institutions that validate the value of your credentials, which pass for qualifications to charge for services preformed. Or go disgraced and broke to the land of the lowest classes. The price mankind pays by proceeding ignorantly destroying the environment and NOT preparing for future destruction is a cost easily ignored by those making mortgage payments.

@@mundymorningreport3137 Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS F=ma.) "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense, AS BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The Earth is ALSO CLEARLY then E=MC2 AS F=ma ON BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! By Frank DiMeglio

Brian Greene 💰 is political. He is maximum money making agenda "physics". He is lying about gravity. He is lying about the KNOWN WEASEL EINSTEIN.

But we have the perfect made up math equation gibberish to explain it, how dare you sir hrumph

If you're sure, you won't mind elaborating. We're ready.

Attraction

I know. I hate it when ‘scientists’ speak in gobbligook and made up terms.

@@davidshelton1898 the universe is simple but not simplex! It takes a lot of simple to make something complex!

@@davidshelton1898 Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS F=ma.) "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense, AS BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The Earth is ALSO CLEARLY then E=MC2 AS F=ma ON BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! By Frank DiMeglio

@@davidshelton1898 why do you personify the universe? Who says it is under obligation?

Expanding Earth theory.

Jon Mallary Hi Jon, try some of Dan Winter's vids [his total disregard on Google suggests to me me he may be pretty well on it].....and then start meditating : ) Peace and joy, Si

+Ashley Law Or maybe hexagons ;)

+Simon V Ok I'll take a look!

+Jon Mallary ok yeah, I've seen this guy speak before on DNA. His gravity explanation speaks to effect and unseen wave structure but not cause and he buys into the black hole notion which, I do not. He's an interesting guy though...but uses a lot of words I've never heard and cannot find definitions for? Thanks for the comment. Have a great day

Sadly true.

I agree with Mhi kl the trolls are not here to join the conversation but to block others from enjoying it. But think of it like this, the thunderbolts stuff is being translated into several languages by demand which several peoples are already moving ahead and their children will be ahead of ours in the coming years in science, math, astronomy, and energy research among other disciplines. By the time the trolls get it figured out that these folks are right their kids will be sharing with them this same material from the 3rd and 4th grades.

Interesting point.

@@channeldoesnotexist your statement has zero substance. I am not against you but could you elaborate with corroborating information?

@@channeldoesnotexist Sometimes I don't know why I even try. Greg Chase made an interesting rebuttal to the hypothesis of the electric universe. I can respect his points and I am interested in a response from a proponent of the electric universe hypothesis. You called Wallace "fraud, quack, charlatan, failure and spreading lies" based on NO EVIDENCE. I asked you repectfully, in no way meaning to tear you a new one, to provide some reading material in which I can explore your allegations (I don't know anything about Wallace and you seem to hold him in contempt, which suggests you have more information than I do). Your response once again lacks any credibility and evidence to substantiate your claims. However, in saying that, a person's character is mutually exclusive to his scientific veracity. We would all like our scientists to be "good guys" but I am certain there are good scientists that are less than saints. I wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors. Peace.

@Deep Set EU has no proof of crater formation. Also, Higgs boson has been confirmed in the LHC. In terms of how science work - experimental evidence forms a model, model is then interpreted and described mathematically, this math predicts certain events that are then tested experimentally to confirm or disprove the original model. Spacetime curvature, speed of light, gravitational constants, particles such as the Higgs boson, have all been predicted by the current model of GR and confirmed experimentally. EU has only words and pretty shiny electrostatic discharge globes. Child's play for children of the mind.

Dude the earth is flat like a cat