Electronics are Magic

Tree wrote:Hard Drives seem impossible.

Modern hard drive = 1 billion bits per square inch. Super high end hard drives claim 1 terabyte per square inch!

The needle head hovers 10 nanometers above the hard drive as it spins. That’s the width of two strands of dna. While it spins it somehow zips back and forth to read individual points on here about the size of an atom. The precision needed is unbelievable.

Analogy is given of an airplane flying 1 millimeter above the ground and circling the earth every 25 seconds while counting every blade of grass. Somehow remembering where each individual blade of grass is on earth and being able to fly over to it specifically and access it along with billions of other blades to form logical complex programs.


That is an impossibly amazing machine. One akin to the complexity of a living organism. Yet that is the analogy given for a modern hard drive. Are these machines really constructed by humans? Or are we just tapping into another more complex energy? Perhaps a free energy of sorts, but rather than just power it is of memory and information. One that is all around us In the lumenferous aether. And these magic circuit boards are simply tuning into a specific frequency of sorts to access this “memory”. Perhaps it is not an “electron ball” being stored in a specific silicon cubicle that is bumped into later, rather It is a continuous energetic aether that all memory and information can be accessed at from any point in space, as long you tune to it properly. Perhaps my analogies are a bit lacking, but that’s because I don’t fully understand how it might work, I just know it can’t be the way it’s described, atleast that seems to go against all my common sense for what humans can make. And we can make some amazing things. Paintings. Architecture. Fine tuned mechanics and electrical devices. But I do not believe we can sculpt billions of memory holders on a size and scale that is beyond what we can imagine with precision rivaling that of the brain. To me it seems more likely they are lying about their methods.


A farmer grows impossibly complex plants that give food. Did he design and build these complex plants that give food? Of course not. And it wasn’t “magic” exactly either. There was a method. A recipe to his alchemy of sorts. He adds dirt, a seed, and water, and in time a plant grows! Anyone who had not seen this might assume it was magic or that this farmer was a genius (and he might be tempted to not share his secret if it meant he was credited as the sole provider of this resource). I believe microchips and hard drives may work similarly. They are a creation that is grown, probably as living crystals. Perhaps this is directed by humans but certainly not constructed on the atomic scale. Take a look at the microchip construction process, it closesly resembles following an alchemical recipe; gold, crystals and rare minerals. Many chemical baths. Heating things and cooling them. Washing and adding more chemicals. It seems less of a construction process and more of following a “magic” recipe. Of course it only seems magical because we don’t understand the process, but if we could figure out exactly how this was done we might could see if there is something more to these processes than all physical crafting.

It seems like you are having a really hard time Understanding scale and you’ve moved the goal posts from your original argument. While things like airplanes and the internet definitely do NOT work the way we’re told hard drives actually do work this way and it’s not a mystery either. In fact unlke most things that are fake—spec technology— it actually continues to advance in speed specifically because of its own advancements in speed and size and the refinements in production.

How do you suppose airplanes and internet might work differently than we are told? (Genuinely curious, I don’t know I’ve heard this before).

I’m a little curious why you would question the mainstream view of how airplanes work but not microchips. Seems they are much easier to explain and harder to hide the true workings. I know several people who have worked on airplanes and one who even built his own (although he did not build the engine) but I don’t know anyone who has built their own computer chip (not from pre-built chips). But maybe you could explain how you think airplanes might actually work? I’m open to theories.

I believe my theory is pretty similar to my original post theory. It may or may not be correct, but it’s pretty much still the same mystery of seemingly impossible complexity, scale, and precision needed for design of microchips and other electronics.

Tree wrote:How do you suppose airplanes and internet might work differently than we are told? (Genuinely curious, I don’t know I’ve heard this before).

I’m a little curious why you would question the mainstream view of how airplanes work but not microchips. Seems they are much easier to explain and harder to hide the true workings. I know several people who have worked on airplanes and one who even built his own (although he did not build the engine) but I don’t know anyone who has built their own computer chip (not from pre-built chips). But maybe you could explain how you think airplanes might actually work? I’m open to theories.

I believe my theory is pretty similar to my original post theory. It may or may not be correct, but it’s pretty much still the same mystery of seemingly impossible complexity, scale, and precision needed for design of microchips and other electronics.

planes do not use the amount of fuel that airlines claim they do. it is impossible for an email to be sent across the world and back as fast as it does over fiberoptic lines. you can search youtube to find more info on both of these. telling me your friend has built an airplane but has not built a microchip has nothing to do with one another. telling me your friend has built an airplane is much like me telling you i have built a computer. unless of course your friend machined every part he used. but as you say he certainly didn't. the reason people dont build their own microchips is because of the cost that is all. it is perfectly reasonable to say someone could do it if they wished to invest in the technology required to do so. in general you sound like a white belt who has no understanding how a black belt manipulates the control of a fight and then expresses that it is impossible for the black belt to be doing so so he must be using magic.

Interesting. I watched some videos on the airplane fuel claims, seems like there could be something to that! That’s odd for sure. I’ll have to look into that more!

You miss understood my point I think; I don’t know how planes work much beyond the basic given theories and I don’t claim they are accurate, I was simply saying that if they do work differently than what we are being told that it would be harder to hide that secret than it would that of microchips since there are more average people making their own airplanes than microchips. This doesn’t prove anything it’s just I am surprised you would so readily accept mainstream views of microchip design while simultaneously questioning airplane design.

So, what is your theory on emails being sent faster than light? Maybe you can recommend a link, I couldn’t find any videos of this on YouTube on this. But I am interested on this. My personal thought on light is that it is instantaneous. If you look at the experiments to measure the speed of light they are all very sketch. Michelson Morley experiment seems to have shown this as a likely possibility. But, I also sort of doubt they are using “light” to send the email information anyways; I theorize “information” or “memory” itself is being “sent”. Or rather, “shared” or “tapped into” since I don’t think it “travels” either, though I’m not sure. But yeah, I don’t claim to know but there’s some alternative theories on light and information I’m more leaning towards to as the truth.

I will await to see the first independently designed and built microchip before I fully trust the mainstream narrative on them. This is my same stance on space; I’m not saying it exists or doesn’t. I haven’t been there and no one I trust has either. NASA claims it exists so it’s more likely it doesn’t, but I will hold judgment. Supposedly anyone “could” build an independent rocket and goto space, the only reason they haven’t is because of cost and technology... but I will wait to see this for myself before I trust nasa. And I feel the same way about microchip technology, which was all originally funded by the government too if I remember. (Either way, big tech basically is gov).

I haven’t done much martial arts but I would like to learn some in the future. Not really for fighting but because it looks like great focus for your mind and body. Do you have a recommendation? I’m definitely a white belt there, and maybe at nanotechnology too lol, but when it comes to critical thinking the mainstream narrative I would say I’m not a total novice.

I really love these posts, it really is interesting, I build my own computers too but like you mention I more or less am putting Legos together. It could be everyday material around us that naturally hold memory, we are not being told or we would make it ourselves or maybe its not from us like you pointed out.

BushidoKi wrote:I really love these posts, it really is interesting, I build my own computers too but like you mention I more or less am putting Legos together. It could be everyday material around us that naturally hold memory, we are not being told or we would make it ourselves or maybe its not from us like you pointed out.

Thanks! I’m really glad you enjoy them that’s cool you have some experience in electronics! If you have some further insight too that’s great!
Yeah, I don’t mean to take away from the experience that people have about building basic circuits or wiring up pre-built electronics. I know all that takes a lot of skill and know-how. But like you said, it’s just on such a different level compared to that of computer microchips that it leads me to think we are missing something here. The gap between commercial microchips and homemade ones is so huge compared to other industries.




Here’s an interesting video series I found from a kid who built his own microchip. He seems like a smart kid and made a pretty cool tiny circuitboard. His presentation goes all through the cool equipment he acquired and how he got it to work. It’s interesting! But here’s the thing; at the end of all this work what did he actually make? A simple tiny circuitboard that lights up a diode. That’s it. No logical processing. No memory storage. No computer graphics or any coding. Just bleeps a diode on and off. The only thing special about it is that it’s a little bit smaller than most simple homemade circuitboards. But not nearly to the scale of commercial MOSFET circuits today. To be fair, he does say this, but he continues to call his microchip a MOSFET microchip. Just completely missing the point that the amazing thing about commercial mosfets is the size, scale, complexity, and ability. Not there name. And he doesn’t seem to question them even after (In my opinion) failing to make one that really compares. He didn’t spend but about 10 seconds saying what his circuit board “did”, The other hour was going over the history of microchips and his story. My point is that we can so easily be fooled by the smoke and mirrors (myself included). I’m sure he’s not trying to lie, he’s probably sufficiently fooled himself. But if we take a step back and look at what he actually accomplished, it’s really not much. In my opinion there’s some greater truth to all this that they’re not telling us. I could be wrong but it’s what my current evidence points towards.

Interestingly, I tried to look at biology to see if there is some comparisons to that of microchips thinking I would have more understanding there. Surprisingly I found the same sort of impossibilities in biological designs as I’ve seen in electronics. Atleast in the way they describe them. Take nearly any aspect of modern biology and critically look into how they truly know what’s going on and you’ll find a lot of smoke and mirrors.
Examples:
How do they know what amino acids are made of?
How do they know what are inside cells?
How do they know how muscles move?

In my opinion from what I’ve seen, they seem to just not know! But they sure sound sure of themselves.

I’m going to try to do some real experiments of my own this year to see what some of the truth might really be. I don’t have a lab or any materials now but I’ll start collecting and working towards some plans.

yah its crazy what that kid went through just to get a pretty useless chip lol, a good conspiracy always leads you to a door that most of the world cant open, they kind of explain how they make a computer chip but not in 100% detail it seems to be a roadblock. Now that I think about it the only thing that actually advance as the years go by are computer chips and everything else that doesn't involve computer chips haven't really been advancing as much. Like airplanes, car engines, radio technology, Architecture

What else has that much intelligence in a small package? DNA comes to mind. DNA and computer code are so similar. Every game, app, operating system is its own creation, Computers have be the the closets things humans have come to creating life. so much of a computer resembles the real world. we can even make interactive worlds and we are pretty close to making it photorealistic maybe in another 15 years we can put on a pair of goggles and have a hard time telling the difference between simulation and the real world. And all this comes from a few computer chips about the size of a quarter with ones and zeros (DNA) stored in solid state drives, The computer chip really is the single most advance thing humans have created.

Now you have me wondering how they make computer chips lol. a computer and the internet really is a universe in and of itself. That humans created? or is there help from higher beings? where the Amish right about Technology being evil? or is it our fate as human race to discover it?

Hi Bushidoki, yeah it does make you wonder how all the advanced microchip technology really works! It just feels rather out of place. Too advanced for us. But also just completely different from how we interpret reality: for example; I can go down to the 7/11 store and buy a little 5$ Thumb-drive. I don’t think much of it because it’s cheap. But I could probably spend my whole life working towards trying to create just one home made thumb-drive and never even come close to this design. Yet, alternatively, the most powerful super computer in the world cannot hold a 1 minute conversation without obviously feeling very fake and unempathetic. It’s a strange contrast we can’t seem to cross between what machines can do and what humans can do. It’s like two alien worlds meeting. Since space fake could it be these machines are spiritual aliens? I wonder, could it be we are being replaced, not just practically but on an almost spiritual level. Perhaps machines are attempting to rise up to that of humans place while training us to devolve to their place (controlled, monotonous number crunchers devoid of creativity or empathy). Or, on a less devious look, maybe we are learning from each other through contrasting experiences and skills. Idk, just a different way of seeing things.

Thought this meme seems to be a real possibility. It may not be anyone “controlling things” exactly, it could just be our world is one of thousands of layers deep, with each layer of reality self-organizing and in turn self organizing the layer below it. Idk, but it seems to sort of make sense. It’s a bit on the philosophical side of things, maybe there’s more hard proof for all this, or maybe they really are designed like they say, but it’s tough to find out with microchip design being fairly far from everyday experience.

Hi Tree,

First off I love your attitude. You are open to new theories and present all possibilities without skewing the data towards your own beliefs. You welcome newcomers to the discussion and are able to have a discussion without appearing emotional on the internet. What a joy it is to read your thoughts.

You've done a amazing job theorizing what electronics are. I've shared this belief for some time now. My answer to myself (which is ever changing) was always that they are simply made by a higher intelligence. Either REALLY smart humans, or some other species? Perhaps from other land.

If this is true, then my interest has so many questions on who these higher level species are and what their intentions are. Is technology good or bad? How about these other species? So many questions on both the spiritual and materialistic planes.

Also I do not want to steer this discussion back into airplanes but the correct terminology that user nf35 meant was jets and not airplanes. There are a lot of conspiracies in the truther community ranging from mountains being ancient trees to jets running on compressed air and not jet fuel. SpaceBusters has done the best video on this subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXRmcumPL3k&t=126s

Back to electronics, magic, and the possibilities of a higher intelligence. I remember hearing on Crow777 chanel about how records hold music and they create a master record. A master record which all other records are produced off of. He said that they would send in a high-priest or sorcerer/magician to send a spell into these records. A spell of magic. Sorta like how if you play them backwards it will say usually demonic things. They were cursing the record so all records people listen to had this curse in it. What I am trying to get at, is that magic is probably real. I'd like to know if magic is ever used for loving, curing, caring, benevolent purposes? Another philosophical question.

active wrote:Hi Tree,

First off I love your attitude.  You are open to new theories and present all possibilities without skewing the data towards your own beliefs.  You welcome newcomers to the discussion and are able to have a discussion without appearing emotional on the internet.  What a joy it is to read your thoughts.

You've done a amazing job theorizing what electronics are. I've shared this belief for some time now.  My answer to myself (which is ever changing) was always that they are simply made by a higher intelligence. Either REALLY smart humans, or some other species?  Perhaps from other land.

If this is true, then my interest has so many questions on who these higher level species are and what their intentions are.  Is technology good or bad?  How about these other species?  So many questions on both the spiritual and materialistic planes.

Also I do not want to steer this discussion back into airplanes but the correct terminology that user nf35 meant was jets and not airplanes.  There are a lot of conspiracies in the truther community ranging from mountains being ancient trees to jets running on compressed air and not jet fuel.  SpaceBusters has done the best video on this subject:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXRmcumPL3k&t=126s

Back to electronics, magic, and the possibilities of a higher intelligence. I remember hearing on Crow777 chanel about how records hold music and they create a master record.  A master record which all other records are produced off of.  He said that they would send in a high-priest or sorcerer/magician to send a spell into these records.  A spell of magic.  Sorta like how if you play them backwards it will say usually demonic things.  They were cursing the record so all records people listen to had this curse in it.  What I am trying to get at, is that magic is probably real.  I'd like to know if magic is ever used for loving, curing, caring, benevolent purposes?  Another philosophical question.

Thank you Active! I really appreciate that, it’s very encouraging
Yeah it can be difficult to stay active (no pun intended) with it feeling like very few other people are really also trying to figure this world out. I feel like the brainwashing has made it hard to have any conversations with my family about these topics since every subject is taboo now and politicized. Good to atleast have some other free thinkers on here to discuss things with. Awesome you’ve come to a similar questioning about electronics! It does seem to point to a higher intelligence. Perhaps spiritual. If it is people, they are on another level of knowledge in my opinion. Maybe from across the plane. I’ve been busy with a new job recently so haven’t been able to do some experiments I had planned but hopefully soon I’m going to get those going!

That is fascinating about crow777’s take on master records being blessed or cursed. Do you remember which episode? I’ve watched some interesting videos on master records being cut and it involves, once again, rare metals (silver, and sapphire tipped needles) and an electricity step called electroplating. Interestingly, there was an old way of creating master records that is no longer done and sadly the last machine lave to cut them like this was bought by the church of Scientology, strangely enough. Atleast, so I’ve read. I do indeed wonder what levels of blessings or curses are possible or if they even are at all. Hard to say.



Sound Coincidences
A few other interesting occultic facts of the creation of the first sound devices;

-Allegedly, Alexander Bell, the inventor of the telephone, first tried to build a listening device by using a real human ear, still attached to the skull and hooked up to vibrate a sensitive stylus. Could be simply for scientific study, but it is pretty gruesome sounding.

Isinglass
-a material used for early speaker diaphragms is “isinglass mica” which is a clear hard material derived from the gall bladders of beluga fish (apparently nothing to do with the beluga whale, which sings). Coincidentally, In fish, these air filled bladders are also used as a resonating chamber to send and receive sounds. Strange coincidence considering such sound properties should not hold to a material after it’s been boiled down, unless objects somehow remember their previous forms and can still hold some of their characteristics? Could be. Also, the word “I-sing-glass” is an interesting coincidence to be used in sound equipment. “mica” being similar to “microphone” is also interesting.

The First Sound Recordings
-the very first sound recording was actually done 30 years before Edison, by Édouard-Léon Scott de Martinville, the inventor of the phonautograph in around 1860. The very first sound was of a tuning fork played at 435 hertz. An interesting choice. tuning forks have an occultic history to them, being linked to vibrational healing energy, and even magic. They’re also used in modern electronics, including tiny quartz tuning forks in watches that use piezoelectricity. Of course, they’re also used in sound, so it could be a coincidence.



Au Clair de lune
The first human voice was of someone singing a French nursery rhyme song called Au Clair de lune, which means “by the light of the moon”. The song is about a man asking his neighbors for a quill to write something important down under the light of the moon. One of his neighbors is a beautiful woman and instead of finding a quill he finds love. My interpretation; (positive) men are often so caught up in work and left brain thinking that we forget to appreciate the real mystery of love… Or, maybe (negative) a seductive woman distracts men from finding the truth of the moon light. There’s different ways to interpret it. It was done in 425 hertz, if that means anything. Etched on to carbon dust and not played until years later.


Scott’s first recording of Au Clair de lune, supposedly totally unknown to Edison, had a number of similarities to Edison’s first recording some 30 years later (being that of him reciting Mary had a little lamb) including both of them being a nursery rhyme, and weirdly, in both Edison’s and Scott’s recordings, years later when experts listen to it they first thought it was a woman speaking, and it was later revealed that they were men speaking (Edison and Scott himself). Could be symbolic gender mixing, or just coincidence.



Sound Waves
If sound waves are simply air molecules bumping into each other then how come I can’t hear a breeze? Or, vice versa, how come a loud band playing can’t be felt with the air it should be vibrating?
Maybe sound is part of the electromagnetic spectrum?
Or is it somehow possible all of these invisible energy “waves” are all part of the same field, just different spectrums of it? Light, sound, radio, even electro-magnetism maybe? I don’t know, maybe not, but it is strange that sound is the only one that is supposedly an entirely physical phenomena. Why do they insist sound is physical? Here’s an idea; would it mess up their model of space if sound was an actual wave? wouldn’t that mean that sound waves should travel across the distant universe the same as radio waves? And therefore, we should be able to “hear” these distant sound waves from distant galaxies, right? Well, obviously we can’t hear these sounds, so that would imply that either these are not distant galaxies that make noise like we would expect, or that sound is not a unique wave, which is what the mainstream tells us. So my point is, is sound being a physical phenomena rather than an actual wave itself, necessary for the heliocentric model? My first thought is that it is, but I could be missing something. If someone could show sound happening in a vacuum then I think that would prove sound a unique force.


Jet fuel
Yeah thanks for clarifying. Watching the videos, I don’t understand how a jet’s wings could possibly support all that needed jet fuel! It can’t be right. Would seem they do not need as much as they tell us or they’re not using jet fuel in the same way. Or my numbers are off. Something’s up with that.



Homemade Electricity Test
Getting back to electricity, a good way to better understand it and to insure there is no foul play as far as materials used, would be to try to build some electronics entirely from scratch. I found this challenge surprisingly difficult, even when trying to find the most basic examples. A lemon or potatoe battery would sort of complete the challenge but I actually regard this as using organic energy like hooking a plow to a horse. To complete the challenge you would need to obtain non-living compounds. Another thought I had was the crystal radio. I found a guy on YouTube who tried to create every part himself. But, he had a lot of trouble with, surprisingly, the ear piece, so had to use a few prebuilt parts. Even still, the final product is tapping into radio waves broadcast by towers that others built. I would like to see a completely home built battery to power a home built motor or lightbulb. I’m fairly sure it can be done, but I just want to see it for myself to see exactly at what point are they telling us the truth about electronics and at what point does it become us needing to trust the government corporation designs for how electronics work. For example, maybe basic electronics are possible, but hard drives and microchips are demon tech?.


Rules Of Our World
One less conspiratorial view of how electronics may work is that we ourselves do not understand how reality works yet we are still unknowingly playing within its rules and we just have a misunderstanding of what those rules are. For example;
It could be that anything is possible to create with enough time, intention, and energy. If you work long and hard enough at trying to invent a record player you are fulfilling the ingredients necessary to make a change in the universe; time, energy, and intention. Even if it may seem impossible, the universe morphs itself into making this a new possibility. And in time, a probability. So, when after years of work, you create a successful record player you may think that  every atom within this record player makes perfect logical sense and that is why the record player works. But it may not. Maybe your focus and energy was on the record player as a whole to work. And so that is what was manifested. You’ve trained the universe that if you put these materials together that you want this sound to happen. And so when you repeat these steps, a wholistically functioning record player works. With some various working parts of course. But the farther down you look, the less specific is your manifestation. Exactly why, this specific vibrating air molecule vibrates precisely correct to a corresponding needle bump is not fully specified and so at that level maybe it “doesn’t work” so to speak. And weirdly, our (admittedly theoretical) physics dealing with quantum mechanics seems to kind of mimic this idea, albeit in a more materialistic interpretation. Where things at the atomic level don’t seem to match that of the larger scales. And we easily write off these as quantum mechanics mumble jumbo, but we can actually see this phenomena too for ourselves; Water always seeks its level. But then why do water droplets form balls? I know the given explanation for why; the surface tension acts differently on small objects. But why? Isn’t it strange that small scaled things act fundamentally differently than a larger version of the same material? As if it’s size and scale literally corresponds to a different set of rules of the universe it plays by. Not entirely, but enough to notice. At Least this kind of seems true to me. So back to the macro scale, it may be that intention, effort, and time are the laws needed to affect our universe. Time being repetition needed, to “teach” the universe. Like when we train for basketball, maybe we are not training ourselves as much as we are training the universe to accept a chosen outcome of the ball going in the basket. Our intention is what chooses the right outcome. Our time put into it is what creates the lasting memory for the next time we play. And our sweat and physical and mental effort is the sacrifice we must pay to exert these changes on the universe. And in doing so we earn basketball skill! Or, electronics, Or other inventions!
Anyways, pretty much anything makes more sense than a 10 billion transistor microchip. So I’m open to ideas.

If this is the case, then what is the world exactly? Could it be a training ground for us to practice these powers of intention? Do we then “move up” from this after death? Or cycle back into this world for a while? Or is there no “point” nor any “controllers” or “Gods” and life is just a weird manifestation of itself? I don’t know.

active wrote:Hi Tree,

First off I love your attitude.  You are open to new theories and present all possibilities without skewing the data towards your own beliefs.  You welcome newcomers to the discussion and are able to have a discussion without appearing emotional on the internet.  What a joy it is to read your thoughts.

You've done a amazing job theorizing what electronics are. I've shared this belief for some time now.  My answer to myself (which is ever changing) was always that they are simply made by a higher intelligence. Either REALLY smart humans, or some other species?  Perhaps from other land.

If this is true, then my interest has so many questions on who these higher level species are and what their intentions are.  Is technology good or bad?  How about these other species?  So many questions on both the spiritual and materialistic planes.

Also I do not want to steer this discussion back into airplanes but the correct terminology that user nf35 meant was jets and not airplanes.  There are a lot of conspiracies in the truther community ranging from mountains being ancient trees to jets running on compressed air and not jet fuel.  SpaceBusters has done the best video on this subject:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXRmcumPL3k&t=126s

Back to electronics, magic, and the possibilities of a higher intelligence. I remember hearing on Crow777 chanel about how records hold music and they create a master record.  A master record which all other records are produced off of.  He said that they would send in a high-priest or sorcerer/magician to send a spell into these records.  A spell of magic.  Sorta like how if you play them backwards it will say usually demonic things.  They were cursing the record so all records people listen to had this curse in it.  What I am trying to get at, is that magic is probably real.  I'd like to know if magic is ever used for loving, curing, caring, benevolent purposes?  Another philosophical question.

Thank you for posting the link to that video. That is some of the most starke evidence I've seen in a while that mainstream science is keeping the public bound to the laws of physics while they themselves can walk outside those laws. Some very, very cool stuff right there.

Tree wrote:How do you suppose airplanes and internet might work differently than we are told? (Genuinely curious, I don’t know I’ve heard this before).

I’m a little curious why you would question the mainstream view of how airplanes work but not microchips. Seems they are much easier to explain and harder to hide the true workings. I know several people who have worked on airplanes and one who even built his own (although he did not build the engine) but I don’t know anyone who has built their own computer chip (not from pre-built chips). But maybe you could explain how you think airplanes might actually work? I’m open to theories.

I believe my theory is pretty similar to my original post theory. It may or may not be correct, but it’s pretty much still the same mystery of seemingly impossible complexity, scale, and precision needed for design of microchips and other electronics.

Thanks Tree, for the super interesting and informative look into microprocessors. I enjoyed reading through all your posts and I agree that it seems impossible that humans would be capable of etching billions upon billions of connecting, layered transistors on a chip that is less than 1 square inch big and approximately .3mm thick. Either something out of this world is happening to help create these or human science is far more advanced than the mainstream is letting on.

fractals...

Mandelbrot system.

an enigma inside an enigma inside an........

Your looking too closely. In an appeasement to your rightous insatiable curiosity.

Look no further than yourself

Microcosm Theory

(Apologies if this is off-topic. I can create a new topic if that’s better but I don’t think it fits any of the currently listed).



Time
How are flies so fast at dodging your hand? How is a bird able to swoop through the air so accurately it can pick out individual insects? How are squirrels so fast and accurate at leaping from limb to limb? Or how does a spider somehow land each leg precisely on a strand of web as it crawls across?  I believe time affects things differently at different scales of size. Smaller objects experience time as passing much slower, giving them more time to react, while larger objects experience the same time as passing much faster, so they are slower to react.

CFF
There are actually several scientific studies indicating that different size animals perceive time differently, with this being scaled in accordance to their size. In the studies, scientists measure different animal’s “Critical Flicker Fusion Rate” or CFF, which is the speed at which blinking lights appear to merge into a single constant light source. In other words, if you were to flash a light on and off, quicker and quicker, at some point your mind would not be able to tell the difference between the light flickering on and off and it would just look like a continuous shining light. Scientists have found that smaller animals have a faster CFF. In other words, they can perceive the light flickering as “individual flickers” at faster rates than larger animals can. This indicates that smaller animals perceive time as passing slower than larger animals. Meaning their world would appear in slow motion, giving them plenty of time to react to things that are impossible for us, such as a hand swatting them. Humans processed information at 60 frames per second. Birds processed about twice as fast at 100 frames per second. And houseflies were about four times faster at processing information at 250 frames per second. Larger animals like the sea turtle were slower than humans, at 15 frames per second. Scientists concluded the phenomena likely has to do with the animals metabolism rate. But to me this seems strange since we are told processing information is done entirely in the brain. One would think that a bigger brain would equal faster processing power. But strangely the opposite seems true. We do see this phenomenon mimicked in computer chips too; the smaller the chip, the faster the processing. Personally, i’m equally surprised that this smaller size has such an impact on computer processing power, but perhaps there is something more to computer chips and size than they are telling us.


“Time passes more slowly for flies, study finds”
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/16/time-passes-slowly-flies-study





60FPS
Several of our time units are based on 60; with 60 seconds in a minute, and 60 minutes in an hour. Apparently we used to breakdown seconds into 60 as well, being a unit of time called “thirds” used by Al-BiRuni, (who coincidentally worked out the supposed radius of the earth, and other impossibilities). Is it a coincidence that our time system is based off the same value as our CFF? Animators are very aware of our CFF since movies need to stay above 60 frames per second or we begin to detect the individual slides and the illusion is lost. There are also some theories that deal with the flicker rate of the tv and hypnosis which may be connected.



Time As A Child
One strange time-warping anecdotal example is the strange phenomena that time seems to move slower when you are a kid, and seems to speed up when you grow up. Illusionary or not, everyone’s had this experience, and I think it’s worth noting. Could this be because you literally grow in size? Or is the perception difference more from metabolism, or brain size maybe? Hard to say.




Time Scaling
The mainstream explanation for this difference in time passing between different sized animals is that the phenomena is entirely in the mind and is a result of faster processing. But I believe it’s possible that this faster processing is happening because time is passing slower. And the reason time is passing slower is because of the animal’s smaller size. Evidence of this would be if this time-scaling phenomena occurred in non-living things too. And I believe it does. Here is one example;



Buildings Fall Slower
stack some small blocks up like a building. Then knock them over. The blocks tumble to the ground in seconds. Now do the same thing on a larger scale by looking at a real building demolition. Notice how much slower the building falls. In fact it almost appears to collapse as if in slow-motion. It even sounds lower and stretched. Fun fact: in movies they will often film a model building falling down then slow down the footage to make it look like a large building. Again, movie makers are well aware of how different time seems to be experienced at different sizes. Is the whole world a stage? Haha. So my question is, why does the small model building fall so much faster than the large building? Why would this be? Shouldn’t the speed of collapse scale equally at all sizes? Could it be that time is literally being experienced at a slower rate the smaller you are? Even for non-living things like these buildings? Or is it entirely through our perception of slower time? Of course, mainstream science would refute this, but it’s actually no less absurd sounding than the mainstream accepted views on time in relativity theory that says one’s speed affects time. But what if actually it is size that affects time? It seems a more plausible theory to me since I’ve never observed the former. Except on a practical personal level, where if you do a lot of things then the day seems longer than if you just sit in your room all day the day flies by. Maybe Einstein was just giving us life advice.






Different Laws of Physics
Time appears to not be the only thing that changes with size; the very nature of the laws that govern our reality appear to also change with relative size. For example, at large scales, water seems to always seek its level, but at small scales it seems to form into balls. Why is that? Of course I’ve read the explanation as “surface tension” But that doesn’t really explain why this force of surface tension doesn’t affect larger bodies of water. It would appear that the fundamental laws affecting our world do not scale-up equally, thus creating worlds that are run by entirely different sets of laws at different size scales. These truths are hinted at in mainstream science, but scientists seem to not want accept what we observe; For example, mainstream science uses completely different sets of laws when dealing with the very tiny (quantum mechanics) compared to that of the very large (general relativity). The conclusion should be that there are different sets of laws that govern different size scales. But for some reason mainstream science refuses to accept this as a possibility, insisting that there must be a “theory of everything” that merges the two. My opposing theory that things at different scales are simply governed by different sets of laws is not that outlandish, it’s simply accepting exactly what we observe as truth: That the world is run by different forces at different sizes.

Other forces that seem to behave fundamentally differently at different sizes include:
Light. electricity. objects become more energy than physical at tiny scales.




Time-Scaling Differences
Other examples of things seemingly slowing down in time as they are scaled up in size:

Hurricanes take days to move their own body’s length, compared to tornadoes that move their length relative to their size in just seconds.
Large explosions seem to go in slow motion compared to smaller versions of them
Volcanoes appear to spew lava upwards in slow motion, compared to a fiery eruption on the ground
All of our celestial objects move relatively slowly.
Buildings appear to fall in slow motion
Large airliners appear to almost float as they fly low
Large container ships move at an apparent snail's pace compared to smaller ships relative to their size.
Small animals and insects move at much quicker speeds relative to their size to that of large animals





Inner Dimensions
Science is constantly talking about “higher dimensions'' despite there being zero evidence for such a thing beyond mathematical theorems. Though, I admit, I too “feel” there are higher dimensions, not because of evidence but because I just “feel” there is something more than just this realm. Feelings of truth are not to be discounted entirely, but what do we physically observe? First, I disagree with the mathimatical explanation of a dimension being of simply “counting the directions one can move”. To me this feels too clean. Not like nature that’s more fluid and organic. It also feels very materialistic once again. Cutting the movements into exact numbers, that fit cleanly on a math paper. So then, my definition of a dimension is “an area that you can move around in”. Something in a “higher” dimension would utilize our space on some level but mostly “transcend it” or not be noticed by us in this “lower dimension” in some way. At first this would seem impossible to imagine and that’s why it’s filled with theoretical mumble jumbo papers. But a more intuitive observable way to solve this might be if higher and lower dimensions were not a direction but rather a consequence of when you “zoomed in” or “zoomed out” in size scale. Things smaller than us, like bugs, or molecules, or even atoms, are occupying “lower” dimensions, and things bigger than us, such as giant trees, mountains, hurricanes, perhaps even the earth itself, are in “higher dimensions.” There’s not a specific point when a new dimension starts, it’s more of a sliding scale. Although, like a musical scale, there may be “keys” that are harmonious and so many occupants live on these dimensional keys. Maybe our human size dimension is “middle c”. Things like dogs or elephants or chimps share this dimension with us which is why we can interact with them. Although they are technically in a slightly different size dimension, but easily similar enough that we share basically the same time and physical laws. But when you zoom into the very small (or out to the very large) you “open up” more space to move about in. Space that was always already there, but is now available to move in a more detailed and 3D way as you zoom in to that scale. For example, a small puddle on the ground may appear flat and two dimensional to a human. And certainly would, to say, a mountain. But if you were to zoom in to this puddle you would find an entire world of microorganisms swimming about in 3D space. You may argue that they are affected by you so they are in the same dimension, but remember that time passes slower for smaller scaled creatures. Therefore one minute may be a lifetime for these animals. They may build entire civilizations in the span of an afternoon rainstorm. Then you step in the puddle and bring to them the apocalypse. It could be the same for us, with our world being a single cell within a larger organism. With hundreds of thousands of years passing for us as our world cell swims through our God-host. At first this might seem a depressing vision, but actually I think it is enlightening; if our world is part of a larger organism, and there is no specific boundary between dimensions (just a continuous sliding scale) then we are also that larger God-host as a whole. We just don’t know it. The same way we are also our own human skin cells, and they are us, we just don’t know it. Which would mean when we die, we don’t really die, we just stop focusing on that particular human cell that we were being and instead focus on the billions of other humans that we are (at the same time individually and wholeistcally). And ‘ascend’ to a higher self. Atleast, that makes sense to me.



Fractal Dimensions
How far does this zooming go? It could be like a fractal and you can actually zoom in or out to forever. In which case, where is God? Is there some ultimate creator? We want to assume God is at the “top of the pyramid”, but really that is a very humanistic and even maybe Masonic view of things. They try to create a ladder of knowledge to heaven. 33 degrees. But 100 divided by 3 is 33.333 forever. It never reaches an end. I guess I mean it seems to be ever trying to reach something that can’t be attained. We think God is above, but really, if he is the ultimate creator he probably just is all of creation itself. But who knows, if he’s God I guess he could have it infinite and be at the top at the same time.






Light
Light is often a representation of God. Perhaps God is light? Perhaps light doesn’t have a “size” or even a “speed” therefore it transcends these limitations and permeates through all layers of dimensions, Expressing creation in different ways in each layer it goes through. The electromagnetic spectrum is described as just that; a wave that changes “frequencies” as it passes through the different “dimensions” (sort of). The waves on a different frequency we cannot see and appear to go right through our dimension. We can see the rainbow colors because that is the spectrum we occupy. Smaller animals probably see a different range of light. And indeed, insects are known to see ultraviolet and an extended range of colors on the electromagnetic spectrum. Is it because they have a different receptor in their eyes, or is it directly associated with them being smaller and thus on a lower inner dimension with different rules? Not sure. but it is an interesting coincidence that ultraviolet sight seems mostly associated with bugs and not larger animals. We get similar signs from viewing subatomic particles; this is done with using X-ray and other invisible light spectrums to us. Perhaps it’s a bit like arguing semantics to say the light is in another dimension or just on a smaller frequency. I guess It’s kind of the same thing. Still, it seems a more accurate way to describe invisible light waves to me, especially since they pass right through walls and our bodies. I don’t understand how that can be if they are in the same dimension. But that could be my lack of knowledge for electromagnetic wave characteristics.
   
It’s interesting to me that light is described as both a wave and a particle. Two completely opposing concepts. It makes me think of God as being described as both the Alpha and the Omega. Beginning and End are also opposing concepts. How do you even picture two opposing concepts? They are basically a paradox. I find it fitting to describe God as a paradox, actually. It makes him feel indescribable and Godlike. Maybe a paradox is the best our feeble human minds can do to describe him.




Electricity
I have touched on this theory when talking about electricity. I believe electricity may be alive. Many of electricity’s characteristics are things that only living things exhibit. For example, electric therapy has been proven to heal burns, heal nerve damage, and even cure depression and mental illness. It jump starts clone cells. And given the right chemicals it will even spontaneously form amino acids. It is also a vital part of all life forms. Your heart generates an electric charge when it beats, and is used for synaptic firings and muscle movement. It’s also vital for all complex electronics including microchips that are impossibly complex and resemble tiny cities. These microchips process logic in seemingly intelligent ways. One way to explain these interactions would be if electricity is actually “alive” and is simply very very tiny so that it experiences time much much slower than us. A microchip that can perform a billion processes per second seems impossible unless to that microchip a second was hundreds of years. Perhaps individual packets of electric pulse may be a tiny tiny living creature that travels about its microchip city, performing its daily tasks. It’s entire life being but a split-second to us. Completely unaware that all of its work is being harvested by a higher being to run his phone. Perhaps our own world’s architecture is designed to harvest our world’s energy in a way we can’t fathom too. Perhaps the great reset is a planned update which will reset humanity and start over. That’s kind of scary. But of course, when a phone dies we don’t worry that the electricity “died” we understand that the energy simply dissipates into the surrounding environment. Energy (thus, life) cannot be created nor destroyed. It may even “rise up” to the sky. Living as a static charge as a cloud in the “heavens.” And eventually congregate into a lightning storm to strike back to earth. Who knows the possibilities, the main point being that electricity fits much of the concepts of an inwards dimensional microcosm of intelligent living creatures. Of course, I’m not certain. I’m not trying to “prove” anything, just trying to make sense of what I observe in our world with less bias from scientism.




Collective Intelligence
There is an interesting principle called the ‘wisdom of the crowd’ which says the collective average intelligence of a crowd of people will be much greater than that of any individual. This has been shown to be true in experiments like the jelly bean guessing experiment where you have a large group of people guess the number of jellybeans in a jar and you then take the average of all the guesses and you will be surprisingly close to the actual number in the jar. I believe this may be evidence that intelligence extends beyond the mind of an individual and is influenced by its surroundings, and may even be a result of multiple consciousness working together. It seems that organisms of similar type will naturally self organize to solve problems. You can also observe this phenomenon in schools of fish, all moving in unison to avoid prey. Or flocks of birds. Or ant colonies where individually each ant is not intelligent enough to do much beyond simple tasks, but as a whole they create entire complex ant colony structures. This may be how our own mind’s intelligence works; individually our cells are not smart but as a whole together they somehow share a collective intelligence greater than themselves that lets us think. This unified collection of intent may be what forms a higher intelligence, or a ‘being’ in a ‘higher dimension,’ including us humans. Maybe there is no singular ‘soul’ but rather life spontaneously arises when enough smaller organisms work together for a collective cause. Could it be that all of humanity as a collective consciousness creates an individual larger intelligent being in a “higher dimension”? Perhaps organizations, countries, and corporations may be the organs and systems of this being. If we are, would we know? It seems that on almost every scale of size the organisms at that level are unaware of the level above them. Ants are not aware that they built their colony in Central Park. Or even in an ant farm. The micro organisms living on the ants body are equally unaware that their very terrain they live on is a living creature. And the atoms that make up these microorganisms are likely equally unaware that their entire cosmology of orbiting electrons and central protons are all just tiny building blocks of our world. It stands to reason that at our scale we are unaware of the larger system we are a part of. It is very frustrating that we are not allowed to explore Antarctica to see for ourselves! We can atleast look up at the heavens but there’s not many clues without being able to fly there. The heliocentric model would tell us there is nothing there. Just infinite emptiness. The corrupters seem obsessed with killing the idea of God. They don't want us aware that we may be part of a greater system, because if we knew then they would not be at the top.



Why Love is a Higher Dimension and Hate is a Lower dimension?
Love basically means unity between people. An understanding. An empathy. It means those individuals will work together for a greater shared purpose. Maybe through a family. Maybe through teamwork. This unity can be utilized into a usable state by a larger dimensional being. For example, if we view our world as a cell, then if all the people in our world cell are working together in “love” then we will be an efficient cell that can do its “higher task” in the larger life form that we are within. Maybe we are like a blood cell. But if the people within that cell are not working together then the cell may malfunction and die. Or worse, become cancerous. This is like turning away from God (the larger life form).


Christianity says that the wages of sin are death. But with God’s love we can have eternal life. This could just be psychological manipulation to control people under a religion. But it may also have some real truth to it. Perhaps information is layered with symbolism from higher dimensional truths, and we read them literally in our dimension but can sometimes interpret the greater truths through symbolism. So, maybe this passage is saying if you view yourself as just an individual then when you die you might believe you are dead. Or be broken into smaller pieces at lower dimensions and then occupy them as yourself. This would be like dying and going to the underworld. But if you understand that you are more than yourself. That you are actually a part of God (the same way your skin cell is a part of you) then when you die you will realize you are not dead because you are more than a single cell, you are part of an entire larger life form. And your focused consciousness is transferred to here (or, perhaps it never left). And thus you will live on with God. Maybe this will be my religion.

This entire thread from electronics to time has blown my mind. Thanks for the interesting theories.

Light Is Not A Wave Theory
Continuing my research on the claims of light as being a ‘wave’.
I will readily admit that I don’t actually know that light is or is not a wave, but after observing the foundational experiments done that are supposed to have proven it a wave I have concluded that to me it seems more likely that light is simply a ‘ray’ or ‘beam’ or perhaps something else entirely, but a ‘wave’ seems like the last way I would describe light.


Experiments that Claim To Prove Light Is A Wave
As far as I can tell there are basically two foundational experiments that seem to be what scientists point to as proof that light is a wave. They are Thomas Young’s Double Slit Experiment and Henrich Hertz’s Spark Jump Experiment. We will look at each of these to see what they actually show. Then we can come to our own independent conclusions as to what they indicate to us about the nature of ‘light’.



Heinrich Hertz – ‘Spark Jumping Experiment’ (Alleged Proof Of Light as an Electromagnetic Wave)
Hertz had a spark generator connected to an antenna (just a foil dish will do). He then also had a metallic ring with a gap in it set at some distance apart. Hertz would manually generate a spark at the spark generator. At the same time, a spark would seemingly magically be generated at the metallic ring! He could see it ‘jump across the gap!’ of the ring. Why did this happen? It would seem that the spark generator somehow communicated this ‘electric spark energy’ across to the metal ring. Fascinating! But how? The logical conclusion should be that we don’t know. However, Hertz claims that the reason is because the ‘sparks’ are traveling like ‘waves’… This to me seems like a completely illogical conclusion. Nothing about this demonstration proves the ‘sparks’ are moving in a ‘wave’ motion at all. (it also does not prove this is the same energy or phenomenon as light. Or magnetism for that matter, so I don’t see how this experiment supports Maxwell’s equations, either). My thought would be that this ‘spark energy’ moves across in an invisible straight ‘beam’ or maybe ‘ray’ like light does (not a wave), or, maybe like electricity does in a sort of ‘jumpy connected motion’ Any of these seem more probable than a ‘wave’ motion. Also, our devices seem to support this idea, since radio towers (which allegedly also work with ‘waves’) seem to need to have direct line of sight with their targets. Where as ‘waves’ can travel around curves.   (the radio signals may still be able to pass through ‘some’ solid objects, similar to how sound does). Of course, that is several different phenomena we are talking about too now, so let’s not get them mixed up! I’m not sure why mainstream science is obsessed with combining ‘light’ ‘electricity’ and ‘magnetism’. Not sure what they all are but they seem about as similar as rocks and wind to me. In any case, Hertz’s experiment does not seem to prove light is a wave to me.



Thomas Young
In 1820 Thomas Young performed the ‘double slit experiment’ where he tried to prove that light was a wave. Here is the actual experiment:
He shined a green light through two slits cut in a cover. The light shined through the small slit openings and shined on the back wall. Interestingly, it made a pattern on the wall looking like: “light-dark-light-dark” etc. outwards in both directions from where it hit. One might expect the light to cast an even gradation outwards, so that is certainly an interesting observation. That is the end of the observation. We should be careful not to carry our bias with it. From here we may speculate on reasons, or even better carry out more similar experiments are certainly needed before coming to any certain conclusions about these seemingly odd results. For example, what if you used a single slit? What if you used multiple lights? what about the material it shines on? Or the pattern inside the lightbulb? Rather than carry out other experiments he simply jumps to conclusion that I believe does not align as a good explanation.

Young’s Explanation – Light is Waves.
Young’s speculative explanation: he proposes that the light from one slit is ‘interfering’ with the light from the other slit similar to how a ‘wave’ in water interferes with another ‘wave’. He claims that waves do this same thing and create patterns of ‘strong waves and then no-waves’ as they collide, and then this is represented when they hit a wall or something. My objection to this: When does one ever observe this? I’ve lived by the ocean; waves roll in succession (not a constant shining ray of strength, like a light). They also never ‘cancel each other out’. They may crash together. They certainly don’t form this ‘interference pattern’ on the sand or walls that they hit. Nothing about Young’s comparison to waves seems remotely similar to real waves! Even on a small scale, waves do not seem to behave similar to the patterns shown on the wall. For one thing, waves ‘move’. They are by definition a movement as they are not a standing thing, they are simply a phenomenon of 2D movement (the surface of the water) next to 3D space (the air above). No one has ever observed a ray of light to ‘move’. Perhaps a star may pulse, or the source of these rays may move across the sky, which is different. But a singular ray of light does not shine at all similar to how a series ‘wave hits in succession on a wall’. So, I believe his interpretation of light rays as waves is a very bad analogy to our observations of light.


Single Slit Experiment Proves Its NOT Wave Interference
Another glaring problem with Young’s theory of the dark-light pattern on the wall is that this ‘interference pattern’ (as he claims it is) can also be observed when there is only a SINGLE slit! (and therefore, there should be no other light source to ‘interfere with it’). Some have claimed that in this case perhaps the ‘interference’ is coming because ‘every space in the slit’ acts as another ‘source of light’ to interfere with the ‘other sources of light’. Well then, how come all light isn’t constantly ‘interfering with itself’? To me, as I stated earlier, the ‘interreference pattern’ would not be so clean. Nor so stable if it was happening from ‘waves’. Also, why then always present the experiment as needing TWO slits if they are not necessary for proving the wave interreference theory? Is it just because we humans feel like there needs to be two slits to interfere with each other? Perhaps ‘convincing us’ was more the priority than ‘proving’ anything…


More Experiments Are Needed To Learn About The Nature Of Light
Some interesting points: this ‘interference pattern’ can also be observed when light is shined through a tiny hole rather than a slit. It then makes a circular pattern.
More experiments with shining laser lights through slits and holes and other shapes I believe may lend us closer to an explanation. Some other experiments I would like to see carried out: what about using multiple colored lasers? A red and blue? Each shining through different slits (or the same) and causing a pattern on the wall. Would this pattern be different in some way? Perhaps giving us a clue? Apparently white light does not cause such an ‘interference pattern’. Perhaps because it is multiple colors of light. Then this made me wonder; are the ‘interference patterns’ just the ‘gaps’ in the light ray where the other colors would be? Like a rainbow pattern with only red showing? Maybe not, just an idea. (unlike Young, I won’t jump to any conclusions as ‘proof’)


Some other wild speculation of mine:
-Perhaps the light is reflecting off of the wall to form this pattern somehow?
-Could the pattern be a shadowed reflection of the inside of the laser light? Like perhaps the coils block the light somehow?
-Or is it somehow a cast shadow of the slit gap?
-Maybe light is bouncing back from the barrier?
I really don’t know. Perhaps this patterning is a natural way that light is. There’s a lot more experiments with this that could be done that would probably eventually yield an answer!


James Maxwell
Maxwell created a set of mathematical equations that apparently predicted there are electro-magnetic waves. Quite honestly, his ‘equations’ just look like magic mumbo jumbo to me, but supposedly it makes theoretical since to some, so, I’ll leave others to critique it if they wish). This idea of “electro-magnetic waves” sounds familiar enough to us now, but think about what that really means. “Electrical,” as in electricity. “Magnetic,” as in attracting or repelling based on invisible fields, and “waves” similar to ‘water waves’ (the only type of ‘wave’ humans have ever experienced; remember that all other explanations of waves are analogies to this). These concepts he connected together with ‘light’ by describing them with ‘mathematics’ (that, if we are honest, most people do not understand) and was then able to convince people that this was true. I’m not saying it is or is not, simply stepping back for a moment to think about what he’s really saying. Again, I’m not the math guy, so I will leave these magic math spells alone for someone else to deal with their validity. But in my opinion, most of this ‘high math’ is perhaps more akin to psychological sorcery to distract the logical side of the mind.


It's encouraging to see some other truth seekers researching this topic. Hopefully our combined efforts will lead to some greater understandings of the nature of our reality.



Sun Ray Pattern
It also occurred to me that rays shining from the sun seem to have distinct ‘rays’ that shine out. Some stronger than others. I can’t tell if this is purely an optical phenomena or is it that light sources like the sun have distinct light ray patterns?

Wow that is very interesting! Definitely a lot to think about.

Maybe we are on a CD of sorts and the sun is the laser

k4t wrote:Wow that is very interesting! Definitely a lot to think about.

Maybe we are on a CD of sorts and the sun is the laser

Cool idea! The sun sort of reading our information as it goes by. I think an open mind to these sort of possibilities will help us closer to the truth. That idea seems strangely plausible to me when you consider how strange our electronics are. CDs in particular are very mysterious to me. The speed and precision at which the laser flies over the CD pits to read the ‘encoded information’ is just unbelievable.

Nice work Tree, Thomas Young original experiment only had a single slip of card. When you complete this experiment using water (to demonstrate light as a wave) you don't get an interference pattern as described in the original experiment. You can't use water to demonstrate light is a wave.

Alpha wrote:Nice work Tree, Thomas Young original experiment only had a single slip of card. When you complete this experiment using water (to demonstrate light as a wave) you don't get an interference pattern as described in the original experiment. You can't use water to demonstrate light is a wave.

Thanks, Alpha!
Yeah, that’s what I thought. The ‘light to water waves’ analogy just doesn’t seem to match. I went for a walk on the beach just the other day and found a perfect example of little water waves flowing across a tide pool. They never seemed to ‘cancel each other out’ and when they hit the sand they did not create an ‘interference pattern’, just little laps on the sand. Once again, the ocean seems to give us better truth of our reality than textbook cartoons.

Light is still mysterious. Seems like they don’t like us questioning these things.

Another thing I was thinking; I wonder does light being ‘instant’ somehow mess up their heliocentric model? Because it seems like the more obvious answer. It’s what we naturally observe. And it would even make more sense with regards to light speed being the ‘speed limit of the universe’ (because, you can’t travel ‘faster’ than ‘instant’...). And time would not really effect it in the same way. I’m sure they can’t actually measure it’s ‘speed’, so why not just conclude it’s instant?

This was shared on Einstein's Relativity Theory is Wrong thread:



The presenter states modern science insists light can be a particle or a wave.  Whichever is convenient to them.

One of the hardest things as a new person to a lot of these conspiracy theories is I am intelligent and educated (or at least think I am) and when I read posts like this the first thing I want to do is yell "it's not magic just because you don't understand it" and then vomit out everything I've been indoctrinated with My entire life.

I studied electrical science with the plans to be an electrical engineer.  However after a couple years once I've learned a lot of the hands-on fundamentals, when they started getting into explaining microchips I remember asking one of the exact same questions you just asked:

"How do you take a bunch of resistors and capacitors etc and get a logic circuit".  Forget about making it tiny tiny tiny, simply how do you get this logic circuit from other components? I asked my teacher, "so I could build a very large scale but simple microchip on a breadboard with wires, and other components?".  Of course I can Said my teacher, I then asked how.  He said he didn't know. I asked him for resources to show me how.  Hey again told me that he did not know and of any resources.

At this time of my life I simply wrote it off as me being not intelligent enough to understand the complexity of such things and simply moved on to another field of study.

Now I tend to have the opinion that if you cannot explain it to me, then you do not know.  I've started to rewatch a lot of science documentaries with a different eye and I realize now how ridiculous it is that I believed a lot of these things.  

Not to sidetrack The conversation about electronics, however recently I decided to do some digging into how tides work. After watching about 12 science documentaries on The mathematical formulas for how the Moon pulls water, but not birds, and then also pulls water the other direction. I've come to the conclusion that 100% one of the following must be true

1- no one understands how tides work and they are just regurgitating things they've heard so that they sound intelligent
2- they are lying

I think there are a lot of people who are #1 and are like I was and just regurgitating what they learned and representing them selves as an authority even though we're just vomiting the same lies.

Back on the subject of technology, that is my field now. I work in technology consulting and have worked in it for over 25 years. I've had numerous conversations over the past 25 years about storage space.  Every year they seem to have "figured out" how to store more information on a disc.  I have tried many times to talk to people about how preposterous it is that 1996 the largest hard drive you could get is a one gigabyte hard drive, and then in 1998 it is a 4 gb hard drive, and then it just increments every year on the same scale.  Always seemingly staying at relatively the same place of usability. In other words what I've got by 1 GB hard drive at the time the operating system took up about 25 MB. My amazing technology teacher made fun of me because I got such a huge hard drive there was no way in my lifetime I was ever going to fill that hard drive.  By the end of the year i filled the hard drive and I needed a 2 GB hard drive which was now available on the market. Now operating systems can take up to 100 GB of storage alone.  Yet these technologies always seem to stay in parity, and there's always a new drive that has just enough storage to make it usable.

I used to write this off as simply a similar phenomenon to something like planned obsolescence. Somebody figured out how to store 100 petabytes on a hard drive in the 1980s, and they've just decided to slowly roll that out. My opinion now is that it may be something a bit more nefarious.

Anyway this is my first post here in this forum as I just recently had my membership accepted. Grateful to be part of this community and to learn. Thank you for being a skeptic and bringing up something new for me to think about.  (I equally curse you, I was already busy as hell just researching tides and now I got to find somebody with electron microscope to look at a microchip with me)

Thank you for taking the time to read this theory! It’s so rare to speak to people with truly open minds. This world is so mysterious. If more people were like you we would have a better chance of understanding its true nature!

Electronics and Other Mysterious
Exactly how these billions of transistors eventually form ‘logic’ in such a seamless impossibly complex way to create fully running simulations is really just as baffling as the insane scale and size of these microchips. I’m glad you picked up on questioning that! Fascinating that you have a background in electrical engineering! Yes, I too have found that frustration with not really being able to find anyone who ‘truly understands’ these microchips. Nor even anyone who pieces together all the individuals who should understand the varying parts. It’s strange, like they just somehow work without anyone understanding them at a fundamental level, nor anyone guiding the overall process. But more recently, as I have accumumlatively questioned more and more things I’ve realized this lack of anyone ‘’knowing’ how something really works’ is more common than not! Other topics of mystery that I go into in this article include: sound, record players, biology, crystals, muscle movement, atomic structures, light, and even time and dimensions. So, yeah, I go ‘off topic’ a lot because this mystery led me to so many other areas! So feel free to explore too


I’d love to hear more about your research with the tides. The mainstream explanations of gravity never made sense to either. Perhaps you could write a post on it!


I think that is a great idea to build a ‘large scale model’ of a microchip. I want to see how this ‘logic’ works. And perhaps it does, but on the scale they show it seems impossible. But I want to really observe it, not just try to disprove it, I just want to really understand it. But I’ve also yet to be able to find someone to really explain it well to me. Maybe I’m just too dumb to understand them, but in that case I’ll choose to honestly say it makes no sense to me rather than pretend I’m smart enough to understand these microchip's logic, as I’m sure many people do.


HUL Theory
The explanations for so many of these topics just don’t seem to make sense when you look at them. Of course, the classic conspiracy reaction (and one that I maintain is possible) is that there is a secret logical explanation behind how all of these things work and some nefarious group is just fooling all of us (illuminati). And so they do work entirely logically, but we aren’t told how. Like there is some super intelligent group or being that is behind all of this. So, that’s possible, but I’ve come think another possibility may be more likely. One I call ‘human understanding limitations’ (HUL) theory. Here’s the basic idea:
the universe operates in ways that we cannot understand (atleast in our limited ‘human’ form, perhaps. It’s possible we are at our core ‘infinite beings’… but in this realm we are obviously limited humans,). Not because we are ‘not smart enough’ or just haven’t figured it out yet, but rather because we literally are not designed to understand it. We humans occupy a narrow band of reality where our ‘logic’ does work to make sense of things... So, while we can’t fully understand all of the universe we live in, we make do as best we can with a somewhat crude ‘operating system’ called ‘human understanding’ that we use to try to ‘make sense’ of things while we operate as humans. This system works great for most of the things we encounter on a daily basis. From walking around and interacting with people. To creating things at our jobs. And everything we need to do to live as humans. We can understand that dropping an apple makes it fall. Scientist claim it ‘makes sense’ because of ‘x mathematics’, indeed, even flat earthers will claim it makes sense because of ‘alternate mathematics’ (buoyancy and density…) but, (i believe) it actually ‘makes sense’ (at a core level to us) because it is ‘within the scope of human understanding’… we are predisposed to understand ‘physics’ at this level. The same way we understand ‘psychology’. Not because there is a proof to explain it but because it is part of our ‘nature of understanding’. This works well in our daily lives, but, if we try to ‘understand’ things outside of our human realm For example studying the very large, like space and celestial objects, or the very small, like ‘atoms’ or ‘microchips’, then these ‘natural faculties of ‘human understanding’’ begin to break down,. Including mathematics, science, even logic itself perhaps.. things seem to ‘not make sense’… they may still ‘work’ (like microchips do), but they don’t make sense as to ‘why’ they work. Basically because they are so small that they are not operating in our realm of logic. Mainstream view is that we assume the universe should all make sense according to our logic, but our ‘logic’ is simply created for our little slice of the universe. And so we cannot really use it to describe or understand the realms beyond our own little human world.

Creative Alchemy Theory
But this realm that we occupy is more of a spectrum than a hard-catogory. And so the ‘bounds’ of where our reality of human logic ends is not so strictly set, atleast, it seems to be rather plyable. I would theorize that we can use our power of ‘creativity’ to perhaps ‘stretch the bounds of reality’ to let more of the universe be within our band of human understanding. I theorize that ‘creativity’ is actually a literal ‘force’ (or, phenomenon, you might say) that can be tapped into and wielded by humans, but is not necessary bound to them. Humans seem to have the ability to tap into this force and use it to ‘bend reality’ or perhaps more accurately, ‘stretch the bounds of reality’, making new things become possible. Literal creation. Not just ‘combining two things’. This creation stretches the bounds of human understanding to incompase more of the universe. This process I think may be what people refer to as ‘alchemy’. And it does seem to be a ‘process’ of sorts in that it takes a few ‘ingredients’ or ‘factors’ that coupled with ‘time’ can eventually achieve results of true creation. Perhaps all real inventions, from microchips, to record players, are actually a process of alchemy.

The Steps of Creative Alchemy:
Step 1
‘Inspiration’ followed by ‘Visualization’ may be the first step in this process of creative alchemy. Our imaginations may be a link to a more infinite realm of creativity that we can tap into and become inspired (whether by a ‘muse’ or our own doing, I’m not sure) then visualize it in our imaginations, thereby setting the concept into place in the future. Making the invention is then sort of a chain that grows towards this future visualization.

Step 2
Another of these factors seems to be ‘belief’. Believing that something is possible, may actually be a necessary step in ‘conjuring’ it into existence.

Step 3
The next factor may be ‘effort’. You need to actually put ‘work’ into creating this new invention. It’s almost like a ‘sacrifice’ of sorts. Like there literally needs to be a bit of hardship and struggle and overcoming the challenge to create something.

Step 4
The final factor may be ‘time’. It takes time with all of these ingredients working to eventually create a new invention.

All of these factors or ‘ingredients’ together seem to make up the creation process that some might call ‘alchemy’. I’m still working on figuring all this out of course and I’m sure others have a lot I can learn from with these theories, but for me personally I find this theory seems to explain many inventions and human ways of development better than conventional materialistic explanations. An example of this ‘alchemy practice’ of ‘creativity’ are all of the inventions that humans have made. For example, the microchip. The first step was to visualize it, and begin ‘Believing’ it was possible. A note on this was that no one would ever believe a microchip was possible without first seeing that a ‘simple electric circuit’ was possible. And so, that first needed to be built. And when it was built, people could then believe that a small simple microchip was possible… and this may explain why it was necessary for technology to advance in steps.

It’s a working theory still so I’m still figuring parts of it out, but just wanted to share some. And it’s a bit philosophical of course. But I think most science theories are more philosophical than people realize.


Anyways, I was planning on just replying to you simply then I got totally carried away! But thank you for reading, and if you discover some more evidence or mysteries about any of these topics feel free to add them! We can use more people questioning this world.

This channel is very good.  This explanation makes a lot of sense to me.  https://youtu.be/FU_YFpfDqqA?si=If_OjMfq_LgcDgy7. It's goes back to the relay which was the first logic circuit.  

It's important that we don't hold our beliefs with religious ferver.  I'm willing to be proven wrong on anything.

Another theory could be that in utilizing silicon in this way, maybe we awakened some type of intelligence.

Or maybe we awakened some type of intelligence another way, and it guided us here

Anyway the channel owner above is 100% a glober but he does a lot of good thought experiments.  Here's is a 2 part series that I feel proves the existence of an eather

https://youtu.be/bHIhgxav9LY?si=eCInJ71oh4QHzaNF

https://youtu.be/oI_X2cMHNe0?si=0Nxi6isUv7xArOkR

Another interesting thing is Moore's law which is the explanation of why technology keeps getting better.  Moore was hooked up with the Fairchild's (whom I feel like I've heard that name in conspiracies but maybe I'm just thinking of Rothschild's).  But I found it interesting that they called it Moore's law and not Moore's theorem or some other suffix. Seems like they intentionally put limitations on the improvement of technology.

Yes, Veritasium! I like his stuff. I’ve always thought he is very close to becoming a ‘flat earther’. He really questions a lot of mainstream science ideas. Unfortunately he never goes quite far enough to question the theories themselves; it’s always ‘people just don’t understand the theories’… but he’s got some great stuff still.

I’ve seen this video before and also found it very interesting! I’m trying to understand a little more here, because he posts a follow up video and then others post some too. Correct me if I’m wrong because I watched it not super thoroughly:
He has a long wire and a switch on one end and a light bulb on the other. The theory is that the lightbulb SHOULD take 1 second to turn on… right? But, it doesn’t. Instead it turns on instantaneously. Why? My first thought would be that that is because light moves instantaneously. It’s what I’ve always observed and makes total sense. But, he says that it turns on because the ‘field’ beside the switch activates the lightbulb? Rather than the electricity running through the wires?… that sounds, to me, like he is fighting for some excuse for how the light is moving instantaneously… either way, shouldn’t he try the experiment again but this time not put the lightbulb right beside the switch? So that the electricity HAS TO travel through the entire wire first… so we can ACTUALLY measure the speed of light. If I have this understood correctly, then did he not do this? It seems so obvious. I’m probably missing something. But this whole thing does make me want to make a real experiment to really show if light does take time or if it is instantaneous.


“It's important that we don't hold our beliefs with religious ferver. I'm willing to be proven wrong on anything.
Another theory could be that in utilizing silicon in this way, maybe we awakened some type of intelligence.
Or maybe we awakened some type of intelligence another way, and it guided us here”


Yes! All very possible. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was some sort of intelligence we are tapping into with silicon chips. Whether or not we even know it; it’s possible the manufacturers themselves don’t even realize ‘how’ they are being built. I wish more people were questioning this because I think there’s something more than we are told.


Agreed, Moose’s law is oddly stated so strongly and so often… it does feel like a ‘reminder’ from those in charge for exactly how and when these technologies should be released to the masses…