Low Toxin Diet Sunday Silliness with the Periodic Table

Nick

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2015
Messages
331
Nick, your writing is all over the place. The language you use suggests you are offended regardless of whether you assert otherwise. You attack me, in effect call me ignorant, accuse my scepticism of being fake, at least twice, suggest I am closed minded, dogmatic, not Peat enough and why? Because I said

' I think it's bull****'

And gave you reasons..


Regardless. If you wish to make an ACTUAL argument from this moment forth, share with me some evidence of transmutation from this reactor of theirs. And it you cannot, and you agree that there is none, which youu seem to, then what are you even arguing?

Would you only like people who 100% agree with you to comment?
I think we can agree that neither of us can actually know for sure if it's real, and we will just have to disagree about whether the presenters are credible.

Now the electric star theory I could present evidence for days in favor of that but I don't think it would be a good use of my time since any interested person could just read the works of Alfven, Peratt, Scott, Thornhill and others on the subject.
 

Nick

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2015
Messages
331
share with me some evidence
Ok, sorry for previously being too lazy to dig this up, here are some of the papers that tie into why I find Safire's claims plausible. But I don't think you'll be persuaded unless you can entertain the idea that their plasma reactor could be doing something similar to what occurs in the sun.

Perturbation of Nuclear Decay Rates During the Solar Flare of 13 December 2006
Evidence for Correlations Between Nuclear Decay Rates and Earth-Sun Distance
Realization of discrete states during fluctuations in macroscopic processes
Changes in the fine structure of stochastic distributions as a consequence of space-time fluctuations

These are also controversial but hopefully you'll find them interesting. Disclaimer: none of these findings have been verified by the Amazing Randi
 

mosaic01

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
494

The topic is legitimate but this project smells like controlled opposition to me, as a way to discredit the ideas. Everything they do shows they are bathing in money, producing long irrelevant movies and expensive websites instead of getting to the point.

Electric universe is the only theory in cosmolog/astropyhsics that isn't complete idiocy. It's closer to the truth than anything else, but it also has some fundamental errors (antimatter and heliocentrism, for example).

A biological view of the cosmos would be most appropriate, thinking in terms of cellular and womb-like structures, honeycomb worlds with the sun as a nucleus (as above, so below), the foundation of life, with electricity permeating everything energetically.

Astrophysics is a complete scam and only based on theoretical mathematics, not on actual evidence. The only observable reality is biological in nature.

Or as Ray Peat said:

"The idea of a “biological cosmos” seems strange only when it is considered against an ideology which maintains that life is alone in an immense dead universe. The assumption of a dead, unintelligent, randomly moving physical world is the creation of a series of theological ideas, which Blake perceived as essentially Satanic. Blake used the language of these theologies, but inverted them, showing the ways they were used to obscure reality, and to impose a perverse way of life onto the living world.

Fred Hoyle, the astronomer, said “If this were an entirely scientific matter, there is little doubt from the evidence that the case for a fundamentally biological universe would be regarded as substantially proven.” (1989)"

1715752989782.png
1715753513130.png
 
Last edited:

DanDare

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2024
Messages
208
Location
United kingdom
But I don't think you'll be persuaded unless you can entertain the idea that their plasma reactor could be doing something similar to what occurs in the sun.

I definitely entertained the idea and shared the reasons why I found it implausible and there are more.

They are claiming they have transmuted thorium into lead and it should be easy for them to directly prove that to the rest of us rather than dance around the edges. Quite concerning the lack of mention of any lab safety measures also should they be making radon, which is one of it's decay products. No mention of barriers, shielding, extraction and containment, no Geiger counters, photograph plates, monitoring badges, nothing.


The idea that solar flares affect decay rates of isotopes is interesting and I shall look into it further and see how solid that is.
 

DanDare

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2024
Messages
208
Location
United kingdom
Astrophysics is a complete scam and only based on theoretical mathematics, not on actual evidence. The only observable reality is biological in nature.

Did you mean to say cosmology and not astrophysics?

It is easy to confirm the accuracy of the models which astrophysics presents using a telescope, or even just the naked eye. Both observational tools, neither purely mathematical.
 

mosaic01

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
494
Did you mean to say cosmology and not astrophysics?

It is easy to confirm the accuracy of the models which astrophysics presents using a telescope, or even just the naked eye. Both observational tools, neither purely mathematical.

I mean modern physics as a whole, as it relates to the cosmos and universe, including astrophysics. Modern physics is essentially theoretical physics.

Big bang theory, antimatter, dark matter ,relativity, gravity, quantum physics, etc... it's all based on math and not observations. The time that observation itself mattered has long been gone, that was in the 17th-19th centuries.

The relevant questions always resolve around how to interpret what you see, not the fact that something can be observed (i.e. theoretical astrophysics).

A good introduction into the scam that is modern physics is Sabine Hossenfelder.

Quotes: “Most of the theoretical physicists I know are now studying things that nobody has ever seen or measured. They also like to postulate new particles to embellish their imaginary world models. In addition to the aforementioned wimps, we now also have wimpzillas and simps, we have preons, sfermions, axions and flaxions, as well as erebons and inflatons. We even have "unparticles". There are tens of thousands of papers describing these constructs in detail. And the most influential of these have been cited thousands of times. But none of these particles have ever been seen.”

"If fundamental physics is like nutritional science, where coffee is good for your health today and bad tomorrow, then we have a problem."

"We are no longer making any progress in understanding the laws of nature. We operate detectors in underground mines and a number of particle accelerators, including the enormous Large Hadron Collider in Geneva. Nevertheless, for four decades we have hardly obtained any data that could tell us anything new."

"Take dark matter, for example, of which we still have no trace. Perhaps it really doesn't exist. An alternative solution is certainly conceivable. But we would have to understand gravity differently."

Her work is a good start to understand the holes in the entire framework of physics.
 
Last edited:

bruschi11

Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Messages
507

See Revici’s periodic table about halfway down in this link. Pretty interesting the anabolic/ catabolic idea.

Notice several extremely important elements surrounding oxygen. Just tells me how so much revolves around oxygen utilization.
 

DanDare

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2024
Messages
208
Location
United kingdom
A good introduction into the scam that is modern physics is Sabine Hossenfelder.
she's ok as long as one ignores her giving covid and long covid respect it doesn't deserve.

I am qualified physics teacher, advanced level ( in my country the UK that's taught to 16 to 18 year olds) currently not teaching, but have done, may do again, and yes there is a departure in plausibility from experimental to more theoretical.
 

Nick

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2015
Messages
331
The topic is legitimate but this project smells like controlled opposition to me, as a way to discredit the ideas. Everything they do shows they are bathing in money, producing long irrelevant movies and expensive websites instead of getting to the point.
Could be, or perhaps a govt sponsored limited hangout of technology already developed. Peratt works for Los Alamos after all.
Part of why I find them to be plausibly credible is that I would have predicted what they claim to be doing to be possible. Here is my reasoning:
If relatively small variations in distance between the earth and sun, and relatively small variations in the energy output of the sun, can slightly alter the rate of radiactive decay on earth, then perhaps much closer to the sun or a similar kind of plasma body, or with much higher energy flow through said plasma body, the rate of radioactive decay would be radically altered.

I also am more open to the possibility of transmutation because I lean toward the kind of radically evolutionary view of the universe proposed by Whitehead and Sheldrake and others, where the observed "laws" of physics are much more like habits that have developed over time due to the interplay of morphic resonance and the Divine Creative Spark (Yin and Yang respectively). Really these are just habits that we have observed in a very narrow range of observable conditions, and assumed to be immutable due to an unconscious Platonism that has become ingrained in the scientific orthodoxy.
Electric universe is the only theory in cosmolog/astropyhsics that isn't complete idiocy. It's closer to the truth than anything else, but it also has some fundamental errors (antimatter and heliocentrism, for example).
I don't think they are wrong about the solar system revolving around the sun, if that's what you mean. But I also don't think something being the center of rotational organization makes it the center of heirarchical importance in all frameworks. ie the following can all be true: the earth revolves around the sun, the galaxy revolves around the galactic core, the center of heirarchical importance in this realm is consciousness, the center of consciousness is God.
A biological view of the cosmos would be most appropriate, thinking in terms of cellular and womb-like structures, honeycomb worlds with the sun as a nucleus (as above, so below), the foundation of life, with electricity permeating everything energetically.
This is what plasma cosmology as I interpret it suggests: cellular plasmas bounded by plasma double-layers nested heirarchically on all scales. I suspect all such plasmas are alive and conscious in a sense, like the heliopause would probably be the boundary of the Sun's discrete consciousness which contains all the planets. Birkeland currents connecting these cells at all scales are analogous to the energy merideans within an animal or plant's energy body, which are essentially energy flowing along the interference patterns of the electromagnetic biofield, just like Birkeland field-aligned currents are organized in the direction of the (conceptual and imaginary) magnetic field lines.
(See Invisible rainbow: a physicist's introduction to the science behind classical Chinese medicine by Changlin Zhang and Physics of the Plasma Universe by Anthony Peratt)
Astrophysics is a complete scam and only based on theoretical mathematics, not on actual evidence. The only observable reality is biological in nature.
Their mathematics does work to predict many things in local space. Then when it doesn't accurately describe the behavior of galaxies that they presume to be organized by the extremely weak force of gravity, they invent ad hoc fixes for their equations like dark matter, dark energy, black holes (a mathematical singularity imagined into existance as a real concept!)

The electromagnetic equations work much better to model the behavior of galaxies, but really, in a the radically evolutionary Whiteheadian view of the universe organized by habits formed over time, there is no reason to assume that mathematics can ever describe reality. While I suspect most of quantum mechanics is also mathematical nonsense, on this the quantum people would agree since they deal mainly in probabilities.
Or as Ray Peat said:

"The idea of a “biological cosmos” seems strange only when it is considered against an ideology which maintains that life is alone in an immense dead universe. The assumption of a dead, unintelligent, randomly moving physical world is the creation of a series of theological ideas, which Blake perceived as essentially Satanic. Blake used the language of these theologies, but inverted them, showing the ways they were used to obscure reality, and to impose a perverse way of life onto the living world.

Fred Hoyle, the astronomer, said “If this were an entirely scientific matter, there is little doubt from the evidence that the case for a fundamentally biological universe would be regarded as substantially proven.” (1989)"​
I would essentially agree with Blake about the theological nature of the dead, mechanistic universe worldview.
"Take dark matter, for example, of which we still have no trace. Perhaps it really doesn't exist. An alternative solution is certainly conceivable. But we would have to understand gravity differently."
Electromagnetism is sufficient to completely do away with dark matter easily. It's not really all that hard to see that galaxies are organized by electromagnetism. Simply looking at the shape is a strong clue, with an equatorial plane and polar jets. The standard objection is simply: "Where does all the energy supposedly travelling along these intergalactic Birkeland currents come from?" which is a rather silly objection if you think about it. All of big bang cosmology is wide open to the exact same criticism. After all, where did anything come from?
They are claiming they have transmuted thorium into lead and it should be easy for them to directly prove that to the rest of us rather than dance around the edges. Quite concerning the lack of mention of any lab safety measures also should they be making radon, which is one of it's decay products. No mention of barriers, shielding, extraction and containment, no Geiger counters, photograph plates, monitoring badges, nothing.
I briefly worked in a lab where some of the other people in the lab worked with small amounts of radioactive reagents. The level of safety measures employed were basically zero except around the lab safety inspection. Even the measures that they were supposed to employ were much less than the things you are describing. Scientists are not known for great concern about health and safety.
 

Nick

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2015
Messages
331
The language you use suggests you are offended regardless of whether you assert otherwise. You attack me, in effect call me ignorant, accuse my scepticism of being fake, at least twice, suggest I am closed minded, dogmatic, not Peat enough and why?
Sorry Dan, I think I was being a bit ruder than I would like even if I was not conscious of being annoyed.

I can and will give some blame to bioelectric effects of the X8.6 flare and proton radiation storm, but at the end of the day such external factors cannot be blamed for our behavior in that they only serve to exacerbate our existing flaws.
 
OP
C

cfeehan

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
May 20, 2013
Messages
37

See Revici’s periodic table about halfway down in this link. Pretty interesting the anabolic/ catabolic idea.

Notice several extremely important elements surrounding oxygen. Just tells me how so much revolves around oxygen utilization.

This was really interesting! Thank you for sharing!
 

DanDare

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2024
Messages
208
Location
United kingdom
Sorry Dan, I think I was being a bit ruder than I would like even if I was not conscious of being annoyed.

I can and will give some blame to bioelectric effects of the X8.6 flare and proton radiation storm, but at the end of the day such external factors cannot be blamed for our behavior in that they only serve to exacerbate our existing flaws.

I am sorry I should have been a little more diplomatic with expressing my opinions of the idea and I could have helped avoid it but all is well that ends well.
 
EMF Mitigation - Flush Niacin - Big 5 Minerals

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom