sovereignbull on Nostr: His analogy with the drain is pretty close to my understanding. Adding to it using ...
His analogy with the drain is pretty close to my understanding. Adding to it using Ken Wheelers explanation, the drain is in an infinite loop with a shower head.
I agree that ZPE is very real. But he's suggesting 'gravity' is making things spin around a center, and I think he still has a fundamental misunderstanding of what gravity is, because he appears to be working with Einstein's definition. He still talks about the speed of light, even though entanglement is instant over any distance. To my understanding, light doesn't travel. It's a rate of induction of the medium.
With reference to toroidal geometry (a magnetic field), he's saying it's going to flow out at the equator and flow in at the poles. Anyone can look at a magnet under a ferorocell and determine that this isn't quite accurate. Maybe he misspoke, perhaps there is a slight language barrier, but he said the same thing a couple of times. Dielectricity is what powers magnetism, the lines of interference diverge from one 'pole', loop around and converge into the top 'pole'. The 'equator' would be the inertial plane which divides the toroid into two vortices.
I guess my main point of contention is he seems to be mixing theories that are opposed to eachother when trying to explain it, which won't paint an accurate picture and make it more difficult to comprehend. Defining a field, magnetism, gravity, dielectricity, light, and how they all are expressions of the same thing - the aether - really simplifies everything. I've seen very few people who even attempt to define these things, let alone explain their relationship to eachother.
But I'm just a lowly pleb also trying to find the truth.
I agree that ZPE is very real. But he's suggesting 'gravity' is making things spin around a center, and I think he still has a fundamental misunderstanding of what gravity is, because he appears to be working with Einstein's definition. He still talks about the speed of light, even though entanglement is instant over any distance. To my understanding, light doesn't travel. It's a rate of induction of the medium.
With reference to toroidal geometry (a magnetic field), he's saying it's going to flow out at the equator and flow in at the poles. Anyone can look at a magnet under a ferorocell and determine that this isn't quite accurate. Maybe he misspoke, perhaps there is a slight language barrier, but he said the same thing a couple of times. Dielectricity is what powers magnetism, the lines of interference diverge from one 'pole', loop around and converge into the top 'pole'. The 'equator' would be the inertial plane which divides the toroid into two vortices.
I guess my main point of contention is he seems to be mixing theories that are opposed to eachother when trying to explain it, which won't paint an accurate picture and make it more difficult to comprehend. Defining a field, magnetism, gravity, dielectricity, light, and how they all are expressions of the same thing - the aether - really simplifies everything. I've seen very few people who even attempt to define these things, let alone explain their relationship to eachother.
But I'm just a lowly pleb also trying to find the truth.