Occult Tesla - A preposterous reading of Tesla's Space, Time and Energy

#11

so now who is more occult :smiley: the problem simply is wrong or correct cosmology and from it derived physics and on it projected math, on the bright side, “they” do found “themselves” some work to do, however mediocre it is in its effects!

maybe we can compare the 4D and 8D system eg. with wheel, and altho in both cases carthesian derivations still the motion will be more smooth with 8 sides, with 16 even smoother :sunny: so if we want to reach noncartheesis system flow as Tesla was waving, then we need to expand the einsteinian 4D, but go reinvent his fallacies, maybe while drinking beer at the local maltshop :smiley: anyway think there is way to reinvent the math, and as model (in reverse engineering) to be derived from noncartesian system plausibility regards energies!, here I am just juggling with assumptions how could be reached firm smoothening between aether and electromagnetism, but cant postulate idea how such reinventing should start!, hm again maybe through the scalar field physics that was chitchatted between me and chatko [1] also cant say for sure where eventual overlap will popup in the spectrum of frequencies i.e. how eg. we could interpret various speeds in various fields and bending them to reach different velocities etc. etc. is this doable dont know but looks to me possible if and only if we leave the current mainstream physics for the historical museum shelves!

hm I do find interesting all kind of alternative thinking regards various topics that are incompatible to the mainstream flow, but really cant tell which has greater potential for reaching effectively correct understanding of our reality!, such attempts tho it needs to be analyzed and compared how probable would be!, here eg. is one just for fun [2]

almost as if I tend to debunk the current mainstream physics as wrong through simple logic i.e. we need theories and laws that can be observed and explained in simple way, instead as now in complex ineffective assumptions of einsteinians!, as if they enjoy to tilt in “their” selfdelusion till eternity!?, do “they”?, look just how mindboggling sounds the next quote “The intuition for understanding Special Relativity is not profound, but it has to be acquired, since it is not the intuition of our everyday experience. In our everyday lives velocities are so small in comparison to the speed of light that we don’t notice even a hint of special-relativistic effects, and so we have to train ourselves to imagine how things will behave when the velocities are large” [3][3] imagine icecream balls served at pub counter on fifa championship, it would be scene indeed :smiley: not plausible even under the counter in microcosmic version [4] yet many enjoy “their” show while writing and reading tons of books about, surely many dont even care, so in the end the question remains who is more wrong the educated or those who had have luck to evade such education :wink:

1 Like
#12

You needn’t go any further in the debunking of modern physics than its non-topological interpretation of the early 20th century nuclear atom, which has remained totally linear, un-evolved, and inadequate since the turn of the 20th century.

1 Like
#13

if U see I’ve started my row of posts through the last paragraph of my first post ~ about cartesian and noncartesian systems, flushed so would point that the OP text has wrong premise i.e. so would point that Tesla per’se was not occult at all, but while acting as scientist (logically) was deriving basis for his knowhow from different epistemology than that of the “enlightened” royal college, (probably) he was tilting around the issue how to confront “them” in bulk but obviously alone he couldnt, and more probably coz he was above all practical and not theoretical scientist … chitchat logic that later got me hooked to explore the possibility how such different positions eventually could be smoothed out, if at all …

so foremost I am not trying to debunk the mainstream physics meme later, but exploring whether is it possible to be cushioned the shear egomania of the current mainstreamers, practically I am trying to contemplate whether is possible to be found cushioning for “their” fears as faster as possible so we would pass beyond the wrong geopolitical reality that at the moment is holding us all on the edge of noreturn regards the chance for earthly Peace and transcendental Joy … simply the current geopolitics is strongly tied to republicanism (and its next level technocracy) which draws heavily from the age of reason and the scientific revolutions peddled by the neopagan rosicrucian knowhow of the western scientific elites!, thus in a way I have fear too i.e. its wrong to expect that “they” would accept to acknowledge total error coz that would mean suicide for “them” whether on level of cosmology whether eugenics whether virology whether economics etc. etc. on error raised knowhow coz built up on wrong basis!, and if we wants something soon to change we probably need wide and continual scientific reevaluation or better said inspection of the current mainstream dogmas in many fields, for what think conferences are not anymore suitable way for ironing of the imposed wrongness in the scientific realm, but we need active academic use of tool like eForums where we would see open clear public clash of opposite arguments hour by hour not year by year as now usually on conferences or through biased’peer’reviewed portals, eh I would really like to see such approach by mainstreams at least regards general relativity and all the debunking papers that appeared since its inception, I’ve already pointed to the first kickback and squeezingback day after (in the first quote of my first post here), but would enjoy to see some eFestival of debunking through all the existing throws that dispute GR “in one way or another, whether it be the math, logic, or even the philosophy of relativity – there is more written material on the subject than one person can read in a decade” …

#14

I appreciate the willing interaction in physics, and please do not take offense to the following. I suspect that you, like me, are not a native English speaker, but I am struggling to decipher what you are trying to convey.

There’s an application called Grammarly that may help us communicate. Essentially, you’re feeding back very long run-on sentences, and I’m struggling to figure out the premise of your arguments and how they appeal to the articles you’re posting along with the text.

I’m all too aware of the occult leanings of both Tesla as well as the British Royal Societies, their occult nuclei, and the suppression of actual physico-mathematical treatment of Energy qua Aether.

So to address the points you’ve made that I can understand:

  1. Tesla was suppressed due to the public Nature of his inventions
  2. Relativity and its purveyors derive the occult basis of their physics (Relativity, QCD, and String Theory) from Luranic Kaballah, specifically the Zohar, derived from Bon religions of the near-east and the ancient Egyptian cults, from which modern Rosicrucian and Free Masonic thought emerge in Europe. In short, it is an impersonal ‘applied metaphysics.’
  3. Tesla’s Orthodox background, even as he was not a practicing Orthodox Christian, inflamed the ancient hatred of the Babylonian (Cannanite) mixed races of the less degraded Indo-European caucasian races who dispersed after captivity and became gentile Europe (Christian).
  4. Einstein is merely the early 20th-century version of Neil Degrasse Tyson. He popularized an occult interpretation of relativistic physics and ethics and a means of social engineering in high academia. High physics after WW2, like most things in the West, is heavily Jewish. Physicists are the neo-Egyptian Pharisees. The Canaanite antecedents, Jewish or otherwise, targeted Orthodox Christianity for eradication. The infiltration of the destruction of Byzantium, the infiltration of the Vatican, the Protestant Reformation, and the ensuing mass insanity of dispensationalist Anglo-Zionism were all aimed squarely at followers of Christ.
  5. Nominalism and its offspring in economics, medicine, physics, etc., are merely attempts to revert the interpretation of Nature through the Kaballah, which is an endless Will-to-Power process of Gnostic deviancy. Ein Soph is just ‘the void’ and nothing more.
  6. Scalar concepts are unnecessary in physics. A modern theory of the energy medium of the aether and its derivatives (plasma, longitudinal and transverse waves, and life) already exists. In nonbiological systems, physics was always missing the term that is associated with the replenishing of the internal energy of the system, energy which is spent, in turn, in counteracting the negative work done - through local gravity, for example - by the environment on the system. In living systems, this occurs naturally.
2 Likes
#15

… maybe this will help all concerned:

https://physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/transgress_v2/transgress_v2_singlefile.html

1 Like
#16

@omnimatter sorry if I am overwhelming with my grammatical juggling english indeed its not mine 1st com link, but think for those that is they dont have problem reading me … now, about Ur numbered points think I’ve left wrong impression on top wrong interpretation!

simply I am pointing that the western neopagan thought influenced the current scientific vibe, which in various ways in various times, lets say in full swing since renaissance, shaped the scientific trends among other eg. also newtons mechanistic cosmology which actually was descartean [1][1] but as could be seen from history as descartes so as newton in the end depart from such view, what must be pointed is case with many early natural scientists i.e. not all of them were choked by deism or determinism, but as open minded shifted regularly their knowhow trying to bring smooth knowhow that will be more or less compatible with the popular trends, but sadly some rosicrucian invisible college decided “they” needed strong scientific departure from Christianity thus imposed wrong standardization that would give credence to “their” deistic fallacies and through the first industrial revolution and the grip on the intellectual world back then by city’of’london succeeded to secure mainstream physics that would be followed till these days, all that wrapped in fine enlightened “reason” propaganda of particular wrong scientific exceptionalism!

neopagan flow which must point was never close to the hearth of Nikola Tesla, altho as every scientist back then surely he was influenced by all the popular trends, if not else to contemplate how much they hold water, especially in context with his experimental knohow!, here I’ll add even aether for him was way how to come to unified field theory, but foremost coz didnt used cartesian logic and system but noncartesian … eh maybe if he didnt went in usa things would had have been completely different nowadays, at least far lesser he would need to waste time on indoctrinated neopagans among his friends, aside that would not be dependent from the city’of’london fundations which were investing in scientific research, maybe he would stayed local homeboy tho :slight_smile:

also I’ll need to add, I’ve dont claim anyhow that the neopagan inheritance in modern mainstream science comes from kabbalism, but scholastics ¬ which later opened door on the western universities for flirting with various pagan esoteric knowhow, what as inertia think started with formalism [1][1] then spilled in nominalism [1][1] and like that drop by drop reaching to alchemy and deism [1][1] which introduced the emergence of “naturalism” and humanism, which flow shapeshifted in many later forms even till extremes like atheism and nihilism!

yes we can argue how much Tesla was in this or that ism deepened as spectator, but as I am aware he was never blind follower of “their” rosicrucian knowhow, and if so he would had have used cartesian system for elaboration of his knowhow, but obviously didnt!, on top he ridiculed as well “their” delusion of exceptionalism as “they” didt regards his noncartesian approach, some say!, must acknowledge this puzzle of his mindset and physics is knew info for me, but as puzzle fits smoothly in the complete picture why we still tilt in such wrong mainstream physics!, still as I’ve said it would be ideal we to see some heated debate among dedicated scientists on this subject, instead halfliterate like me to make claims!

on other hand yep probably zoroastrian (not kabbalistic) as dualistic knowhow influenced the western european neopagans (kabbalists were inspired by them too), altho such inertia in west first was rooted through paulicianism (and how crossed in europe through ermen’dualists bogomils patarens cathars) and then after as known to templars merged with the zoroastrian leftovers that popped up on east [2] and probably such vibe bit by bit influenced scholastics and eventually with infiltration of esoteric elites in vatican was secured fertile ground for heresies to sprout on the medieval european universities finally bringing full blown alchemic inertia and complete divorce from Christianity, also emergence of rosicrucianism, and finally standardization of the “age of reason” and all fallacies of exceptionalism that followed day after!, was Tesla under pressure from “them”?, surely!, after all he was educated through “their” curriculum, but did he accepted “their” memes as fix, think not, finally he did not embraced the wrong neopagan thought, yet didnt stayed completely on the OC roots, but tried to reach clarity through pagan vedic knowhow, for what again I am not sure how true it is i.e. how some swami influenced him in n.y. follow me, but probably as scientists was fascinated by the kinetic juggling of yogis and tried to figure out if he could too experiment with “their” prana, thus if so he was pulled more by paganism than the falsely occult neopaganism!, I am really bugged why he didnt stayed OC till bone, but yeah go stay completely sane scientific dolphin mids pool of insane occult sharks, he should have turn from time to time in e’eal so would clear his way out, but it is as it is, probably coz if his knowhow got mainstream then without any merit the western occult elites would secure “their” power&might for long and wide, what by “their” own causality would be impossible knowing how rejected Christianity and embraced the fallen metaphysics as deist apotheosis, echoes that keep “them” still locked to tilt from wrong to wronger circles!

~

@Scarmoge interesting share, where I’ve found nice point about aspect of the rosicrucian flow, dont know just how roger bacon instead francis bacon would jump in as ancestral quantum spin :slight_smile: maybe some kabbalist thrown “them” kind of fresh barley entanglement in “their” maltshop :smiley:

84…observation.
Concerning the Cartesian/Baconian metaphysics, Robert Markley (1991, 6) has observed that
Narratives of scientific progress depend upon imposing binary oppositions – true/false, right/wrong – on theoretical and experimental knowledge, privileging meaning over noise, metonymy over metaphor, monological authority over dialogical contention. … [T]hese attempts to fix nature are ideologically coercive as well as descriptively limited. They focus attention only on the small range of phenomena – say, linear dynamics – which seem to offer easy, often idealized ways of modeling and interpreting humankind’s relationship to the universe. [2]

#17

is this grammatical logic possible in the english language, maybe if in our sleep we dont dream but just speak :smiley: what is then language?, and who made the mainstream standardization fix?, how at all we construct in our minds what means what!?, as if I was more precise with my english then all will get my points!?, yep like vine in pie, so just few!, unless the only way to reach vine is through pie …

~

I tried to find where Tesla dropped hint about noncartesian system for his knowhow, but found just analogy about light and descartes, and lets say for me that is enough so would point that he obviously wasnt blind follower of reductionism, but differs quite from the bulk of neopagan western scientific thought!, if other have similar info Please do share it …

  1. Contrary to the most important tenet of Cartesian philosophy that the perceptions of the mind are illusionary, the eye transmits to it the true and accurate likeness of external things. This is because light propagates in straight lines and the image cast on the retina is an exact reproduction of the external form and one which, owing to the mechanism of the optic nerve, can not be distorted in the transmission to the brain. What is more, the process must be reversible, that in to say, a form brought to consciousness can, by reflex action, reproduce the original image on the retina just as an echo can reproduce the original disturbance If this view is borne out by experiment an immense revolution in all human relations and departments of activity will be the consequence.
    How Cosmic Forces Shape Our Destinies | Tesla Universe
#18

also maybe after all my broken english has useful side, thus this typo from the 2nd paragraph from the 2nd post in this thread, gives hint that he was not alone in his knowhow but “they” couldnt silence him easily coz he was bringing practical inventions in fast pace … and this would be correct logic around the burst of the neopagan transhumanist era to which Tesla dont subscribe!, yet not sure how he accepted eugenics, if at all, maybe just tried to be appealing to some benefactor to invest in his lab or ideas, and/or he was bipolar, what tho is less probable, but whatever was the case, solely by contemplating his knowhow around conscious cosmic forces he is departing enmasse from the baconian cartesian newtonian manmachine (deus’ex’machina) meme, and just coz that he was labeled as looney!, wait the day tho when “they” themselves will see in “their” own looney mirror!

so dont mind my english, but do try to find some hints in it, if that is possible or doable, hek if we dont have ability to decipher this kind of unstandardized forms of english, then how we would expect to resolve cosmic mysteries :smiley:

#19

Thank you, Scarmonge and associates. I have a detailed response enroute.

#20

… the article link I posted was by Alan D. Sokal … as in The Sokal Hoax. But if one wants to wade on in … How Alan Sokal Won the Battle but Lost the ‘Science Wars’ – Commentary Magazine

#21

Of course, the media-academic complex labled it “hoax” since it draws the reader very near to many of serious issues in the public consumptions variant of physics, but, there are even more fundamental problems, at the very use and abuse of the definitions of space and time. I’ll cover that issue shortly.

#22

Western ideology, including physics, is based on some version of nominalism and its associated empiricism. Adopting this perspective implies that nothing possesses inherent significance or purpose because such meaning would transcend individual existence and embody a universal essence. Consequently, pursuing meaning must originate from an external source (Godel, Incompleteness). Moreover, the adherence to nominalism, which necessitates materialism, reduces all existence to mere mechanistic determinism. Thus, even if we happen to stumble upon a seemingly arbitrary foothold for meaning, we remain uncertain of its veracity or virtue.

Problem #1: The Problem of the Essence of Space.

The fundamental limitation shared by mechanism and vitalism is what prevents even genuine attempts, as with the article, at a successful synthesis. The inability to think of Energy and its accompanying manifestations (matter) and their delineation. One must go right to the heart of mechanistic thought and demonstrate that where it deals with energy, it does so only indirectly by reducing all energy to caloric (thermal or mass-bound electromagnetic sensible heat gradations) energy, and to Light (local short-range lumination due to degradation of longitudinal systems) and its information content, as in thermodynamics and systems theory.

Problem #2: The Spacialization of Time

For every process - a timing by phase lock of field fluxes (“the phase flow”), red"reductionism persists - not simply by the representation of Space, but by the unremitting spatialization of Time and its reduction to one-dimensionality. It is in the topological level of the embedding procedure, right at the definitions of manifold and continuum, that the fundamental inadequacy of the method arises with respect to its object. The manifold is taken to be merely a mapping surface - instead of the map, its surface, and its depth, which consists of a wave-energy field composed of TWO commensurate, mutually imbricated but DISTINCT manifolds. At this point, only a flat map is produced, which yields an increasing number of excess additive dimensions, which is where string theory (9, 11, or 13) is born. Ehret fails miserably to understand this, but alas, he is not alone by a stretch. Such an approach is destined to fail - unless one is to be content with the metaphor that fields, real matter in real flux, have been turned into. Space and Time must be employed as distinct physical manifolds whose commensurate properties flow directly from the type or nature of the energy interaction - which is to say, from the fine structure of the energy quanta involved. At the bottom, this is a problem subsidiary to the problem of the definition of an energy continuum and the latter’s relationship to discrete discontinuities, that is, Planck-level particulates. In other words, overcoming the failed synthesis of wholism and reductionism is squatting directly at the definition of the space-time continuum.

Therefore, as I see the issue, the very errors in physical theory which the article reviews, are the result of the nominalistic removal of the notion of the Real to be inclusive of the universal, or conceptual. Only a reorientation of physical theory to include the universal (necessary being) will yield greater accuracy for the formalist (contingent being). Additionally, this provide us with a readily apprehendable synthesis of theology, metaphysics and physics and in my case of particular interest, the biophysics of living systems.

Edit: I’ve just encountered Dr. Farrell’s post regarding Tucker Carlson and Dugin, and it appears, we have arrived at the same issue of Nominalism, as I outline in the first paragraph. A very curious simultaneity, indeed.

#23

Various scholars have articulated concepts that mirror aspects of the aether transmission theory, which posits the existence of massless, ambipolar (non-polarizing) charges. Notably, Nikola Tesla referred to unconventional forms of electricity, delineating them as “nonordinary electricity,” “primary electricity,” and “ether electricity,” and identifying “longitudinal electric waves” that differ from conventional electromagnetic radiation. These phenomena are collectively known as Tesla waves or Tesla radiation. Wilhelm Reich described a similar concept with his massless orgone energy and associated orgone charges. Pavel Cerenkov discussed the transmission of “potential,” or its “envelope,” via a pilot or phase wave that travels faster than the speed of light, c, yet does not carry electromagnetic energy. Maximo Aucci and Thomas Bearden have presented theories on electrons devoid of mass linked with the propagation of longitudinal electric fields. Similarly, Harold Aspden has theorized about cosmological charges that operate beyond the limitations of mass in relativity, suggesting these charges are components of a dynamic Aether that permeates space, and in its first fundamental condesate, constitutes kinetic plasma, discussed by Dr. Farrell in his works. Hence, the Farrellian “paleo-physics” in my view, is merely the re-emergence of the aether. For this reason, and no other, Ehret is attempting to place upon the physics of Tesla, the very errors of modern QCD and Relativistic physics, which is the making of a flattened geometries by use of flattened frames, of the “space-time” hyphenated metaphor. In actuality, the work of Tesla and others is precisely the anti-dote, even though none of these mentioned scholars, with exception to Aspden, articulated a complete spacial and temporal theory capable of locating topological interfaces of metric wave closure is no more separate from energy, from its processes and transformations, than topology may be mapped out while being divorced from geometry and metrics - that is, if science and mathematical language are to actually follow the internal dynamics of systems, instead of simply replacing them with static appearances and convoluted approximations. Waves and fields are no longer statistical clouds, but an object oriented ontology.

1 Like
#24

Alan Sokal - I was starting to feel a little bit uneasy with the political, mental illness, social problems and “feminist theory” and I did think this is stupid.
Unfortunate for me because I wasted 1 hour of my time trying to learn more about quantum theory. I could of been outside Observing the wind.

#25

… I did say that the Sokal’s piece was a HOAX.

EARLIER POST (5 days or so ago)

“… the article link I posted was by Alan D. Sokal … as in The Sokal Hoax. But if one wants to wade on in … (Real reading) How Alan Sokal Won the Battle but Lost the ‘Science Wars’ – Commentary Magazine (https://www.commentary.org/articles/james-meigs/alan-sokal-parody-predicts-dreadful-woke-future/)”

… but I would not say that your time was wasted. Acquiring discernment in terms of argument v argumentation and having the ability to suss out the suppositions and presuppositions of others are important skills. Having experience reading things like the Sokal piece helps toward such ends. It serves as an example of how blinkered folks can become and how easily one might be swayed by such absurdities.

Dr. Farrell quite often, and rightfully so, points out the importance of footnotes. Unfortunately, even if provided, they are often ignored or overlooked. Many caught on to what Sokal was up to from the information provided in his “footnotes”.

#26

Sokal accurately identifies the core issue within the concepts of space, topology, and manifold, despite his satirical approach. Upon a second review, I recognized the nature of his work with a second reading, and I had not previously encountered Sokal, I thank you for the reference.

“In quantum gravity, as we shall see, the space-time manifold ceases to exist as an objective physical reality”

@Sandygirl I suggest reviewing the field of physics through a comprehensive resource that offers a historical perspective alongside various theoretical frameworks. For this purpose, Steven Rado’s “Aetherokinematics” and “Aetherodynamics” serve as excellent references. Studying physics solely through mainstream interpretations such as Quantum Chromodynamics, Relativity, or Standard Theory/Standard Model of Particle Physics can be inefficient when done in isolation.

https://www.abebooks.com/9780966757118/Aethro-kinematics-Steven-Rado-0966757114/plp

1 Like
#27

I’m at such a basic level I was looking up words like neo Cartesian, Inexorable flux, space time
manifold, nominalism and a few other terms which helped my comprehension. I just needed to slow down and process the information.

#28

Thank you for the link. I love this field of of creation of who/what we are all a part of. Electricity, magnetism, particles, photons and light. The nature of the universe is the nature of us.

1 Like
#29

If you are a novice, you may look into Walter Russell, who I’ve found over the years of interaction is a good starting point for those individuals without a background in physics.

I am not advocating Russell’s views, certainly his metaphysics and lack-thereof pantheism, but he writes in such a way that it will assist you conceptualizing the idea of a wave-field giving rise to matter.

I would also recommend the work of Dale Pond, who has done some very interesting synthesizing of the work of John Ernst Worrell Keely and Russell, a work titled sympathetic and vibratory physics.

Once you have some basic ideation in your minds eye, proceed with Rado, if you make it that far, come back for more.

#30

Invisible Rainbow
… this also might be of interest to you.
Cheers