The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

Scientists who have long claimed they know how it all works are now in a panic.

For years now, we alternative types have stated they have it a bit wrong.

But they had the math and experiments to prove magick and alternative beliefs were "Mumbo jumbo"

Now, it seems they are not so sure. Several leading scientists are coming out of the "closet" stating alternative universes that touch our own could be responsible for breaking Einsteins Golden rule of relativity. This rule is that Energy/ Mass and stuff in the universe cannot go faster than light.

Now they've discovered neutrino's that seem to break this golden rule.

Neutrino's are Popping up miles away faster than light...as if they took a "Dark unseen corridor"
As a Caveat;
Now many here have told me the things I have seen are impossible, I would like to know if they would now reconsider their position?
Listen to this leading Nerd before you rply.

I laughed my head off when it was reported on the evening news.

That and the astrophysicists with their "dark matter" and "dark energy" - perhaps we'll get to a point where they might just admit not necessarily that they were wrong but that they DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING YET!

It's all I ask for ...!!!

I think this should be celebrated. I mean, it's another breakthrough. We now know something new.

What would be the point of having these people working on stuff like this, research and the like, if we knew everything already? I don't think the scientists should be embarrassed at all. The fact that they have just discovered something like this means that they are doing their job right.

Also, I just have to wonder if it's really that big a deal? Just because neutrinos can break the speed of light doesn't mean everything else can.

E=MC2 is still a fundamental rule that has served us well. It just has an exception, that's all.

Hmm,and how long have I been saying this very thing here on the rave now?And bringing evidence in to show that?Even if it IS somewhat primitive.


LOL As I have said before many times...The science DOES indicate that this stuff is not mumbo jumbo.

We simply need to adjust our percetption of it a little.

I have always awaited the day when scientists fully realize that the science world and the metaphysical world do not have to be enemies. Thank you for sharing this with us. It is very interesting and wonderful.

I have always found the notion of science and the metaphysical being enemies is funny as hell...because it is all the same thing.
I have gotten into many a debate and taken a lot of shit because of that belief.
All I could ever say in the end was.."well,one day it will be shown that this is true."

Looks like that day is arrived.;)
Took em long enough though to realize it..jeeze

lol I agree, Oceanne. I too have had difficulties with that. The funny thing is this all reminds me of the Thor movie I just watched yesterday with my mom. Thor talked to a scientific storm chaser about her being in a world of science with stories of worlds of magic and he comes from a world of both, if I remember correctly. I found that one of the most interesting parts of the movie. It was a very nice watch.

I do believe, that as science will discover more over the years, several things that are seen as mumbo jumbo, will be proved and maybe accepted.

When studying theology, many of the dogma's made sense for me, due to my occult background, so why wouldn't it work in the other direction.

In any case interesting to follow and see what it shall bring over time.

I hear reports they have repeated this experiment 15,000 times with the same result.

Agreed, it is rather wonderful in that we can all sit back smugly and say " I told you so "

Now, about these eye changes, I suspect the brain is opening up a gateway to another realm from which ordinary light cannot escape. A mini worm hole if you like.

My own theory is other entities have learnt to feed /and or communicate with certain humans- but in this fourth dimension.

This makes perfect sense, virtually every organism has parasites and symbiotic relationships stretching back millions of years.

Why should life in the fourth dimension be any different?

Heh,I didnt see too many,with the exception of one or two here who were agreeing Contessa.

I would point out that it is not like the metaphysical people have brought anything of substance to the table. Lay off science, all I hear from the metaphysical people is "Its a mystery".

I dont know about your whole vampire/dimension/eye colour thing Contessa,but I do know that there are a lot of things in the environment that influence how much a gene is turned on. Stress for one, is known to affect genes and could have a hand in subtle changes. I've also heard about certain foods affecting eye color.

I think a lot of people are going to be dissapointed in many senses when truths about certain metaphysical things come to light.
But then again,as one poster stated.."Its wonderful and amazing" how our world REALLY is.

What they don't know.....or keep out of the public domain....could fill volumes.

Science doesn't claim to know everything!

They sure dont Dab.That statement kindof made me laugh.I think people would be surprised to know that there have been ongoing studies of the metaphysical for about the past 10 years or so,thus all of the data available to us on it..In all reality...and I hate to say this,but it seems there is much more prejudice against sciencce by the metaphysical community than the other way around.Thats just an observation.

https://www.vampirerave.com/journal/journal_section.php?section=poetry&journal=idbeholda&page=August%202006

Level 6: Side Effects

As dabbler and others have pointed out, Science never has and never would claim to know it all. Frankly, only belief systems are notorious for making such dogmatic claims to absolute "Truth."

And... might I point out that, in fact, E=mc2 already possesses and, thus, presupposes a faster-than-light component. It's built right into the equation plain as day!

E = energy, m = mass ...

... and c2 = the Speed of Light... squared!

Master Upir that is an over simplification and untrue.

The equation suggests one can NEVER exceed the speed of light because a particles mass is supposed to increase exponentially as the speed of light is approached.

The equation shows it would take more energy than exists in our universe to break this rule.

Now they have slowly began to uncover hidden energy and matter.

For every cluster of galaxies there is dark matter balancing the light matter.

It was believed "mankind" had no access to this dark realm,
but it seems Cern may have popped neutrinos through an alternative universe ?

I wonder what will happen if other things come through the hole? You may recall several UFO sightings that mention craft vanishing as if into another dimension, such as the rendlesham forest incident which conveniently I cannot embed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENMQQ_Aob70

That is assuming that anything could even survive "popping through the hole" Contessa.

True, I do not think it is normal matter, my guess is electro magnetic, the blue/black light is the clue.

Fallenstar, I think you are mistaken. Another dimension would not have the same electro magnetic stuff we have.
More likely the complete opposite- Anti-electro magnetic forces to fit in with the anti-matter theories.

What makes you so sure of that Contessa? Maybe thats what dimension is all about,subtle differences in electromagnetic feilds...

Cannot be sure but those in the know speak of positive and negative flows of energy...it's a sexual transfer.
I also have it on good authority it can be fatal /fry circuits or so Goldenhawk says.

Amazing advances in Science happen everyday. :D

Remember, things in Science are generally referred to as theories, such as the "Theory of Relativity"

the·o·ry   /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Show Spelled[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA
noun, plural the·o·ries.
1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Synonyms: idea, notion hypothesis, postulate. Antonyms: practice, verification, corroboration, substantiation.
3. Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles: conflicting theories of how children best learn to read.

Science does not generally refer to things as fact.

Nice call Lashes,and you are so right.

Contessa,yes,there are pos and neg energies,but whether its sexual? I would have to disagree at this point in time.You know,just keep in mind that certain beings of other dimensions are asexual.

My opinion on that could change,but for now,Im voting no on that one.

OK folks, let's dig slightly deeper. Tachyons have been proposed for years. They are particles with mass that must move faster than the speed of light and cannot slow down to the speed of light without infinite energy.

There is a nice article of wikipedia about tachyons. We are used to bradyons which cannot approach the speed of light without infinite energy. Einstein's famous equation does not preclude massed particles moving faster than the speed of light just the traveling of exactly the speed of light. The better question is how could we convert bradyons, matter that we familiar with, to tachyons and back? ;)

Oh, that's easy, just exchange them during an accelerated brain experience.
Mmm now how to light you up??????????????????????? ;)

You are not funny, vampirism and sexual exchange are two completely different things, no matter what history says.

Contessa,

Contrary to your argument, this equation has nothing to do with whether matter can be accelerated to the speed of light or beyond. While later equations did evidence matter as being incapable of this under conventional understandings, yet Einstein's elegant explanation for what most basically constitutes Energy had nothing to do with attempting to argue or resolve that question.

The equation, E=mc2, was neither discovered nor applied to express some inviolability of the Speed of Light, but, instead, to define the most basic constituents of Energy, itself, once reduced to their least common denominators. The equation expresses quite eloquently what it takes to create Energy, or more specifically, what exactly the most basic components are that make up Energy in all its forms.

Thus, the equation is exactly as stated: Energy equals matter times the speed of light squared... period.

As Wikipedia distills it... "Thus...the total energy of an object or system is equal to its rest mass times c², a useful equality."

Now, does this definitively state that faster-than-light travel for matter is possible? Of course not, and I never said that it did.

What I tried to point out is that the implication is inherent to the equation that perhaps there does exist a not-yet-understood principle whereby the Speed of Light must be superceded by matter on some level for Energy in any form to be created.

Were this not so... the equation expressing how Energy is created would not require that the Speed of Light be squared to achieve it.


A great website that provides a wonderful overview of this equation and its definition and applications can be found here:

http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/emc2/emc2.html

Something else to consider that will play with your head is the realization, as Einstein and others likewise realized and concluded, that matter and energy are actually interchangeable forms. Matter can be partially or (in the case of matter and anti-matter) completely converted into energy. And energy can be converted into matter. Thus... both are expressions of one another in different forms.

Given this... consider the undeniable fact, as also theorized by Einstein and then later proved when demonstrated that light can be bent by gravitational fields, that light possesses ... mass! And, thus, light (like all forms of energy) is matter in a different form given that it possesses mass.

Thus... Light is, in fact, both matter and energy in that it possesses mass and is, thus, affected by gravitational fields.

Therefore... Light, itself, in possessing mass, is by basic physical definition a converted form of matter. Therefore, Light is arguably a form of matter... traveling at the Speed of Light!

That fits in quite well with my notion of, "If you can see it then it probably isn't energy."

lol

actually einstines theory states that nothing can ACCELARATE TO OR BEYOND the speed of light.
it never states that particals cant start out faster than the speed of light... now also u have to keep in mind of einstiens rosenbridge.. if a partical is to arive somewhere at a rate that was "mathmaticly faster than light, then 1 of 2 things happened... either that patical was alrady going faster than light wen it was created...OR. it punched a hole through space time itself making it seem that it went faster than light... wen in fact its not

now i would like to point out that we (as in the human race, not specific country) might have the technolegy to creat an Einstein rosenbridge already....

now for those who have no idea wth an einstein rosenbridge is... its a "wormhole" for lack of a better word.

an incident that happened in the skies of norway
12-09-2009... it was right b4 day break. it was quiet THE ENTIRE TIME i might add and this light suddenly started spiralling out from behind the hills and this thing just opened up into a dark, black circle for like 3 mins, then disapated.
some believe it was H.A.A.R.P. that caused this... but thats a bunch of bull crap also because who on this planet can visually see radio freaquencies with thier bare, un aided eyes???.....welll??? im waiting...
...exactly my point

now keep in mind that not a single noise came from this thing... the police got 1000s of calls reporting it within that time period of the incedent.... the next day, russia reported it as a failed missle launch...

#1 thats a steaming pile of doo doo because there wasnt a single noise that came from it,

#2. the blue stream of light stayed there for more than 4 HRS and was seen there (BARELY) FOR PRETTY MUCH THE REST OF THE DAY.....

#3. that DOES NOT HAPPEN WITH THE EXAUST OF ANY AIR CRAFT OR "SMOKE TRAIL" FROM ANY MISSLE OR ROCKET PROPELLED DEVICE.....

the reason im bringing this up is because i want ppl to be a lil more open minded about "wormhole technoligy...
if that sub atomic partical went faster than the speed of light..even by a fraction... then this incedent could prove useful to this descussion

now im going to poste the link of this video....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcKZ7qESimw&list=PL063B6AA4D1305067&index=1

What he says...

just to add my own little twist, the one thing I am certain of, people will read our posts in 200 hundred years time and chortle at our ignorance.

Time and time again theories about flat worlds tiny universes etc have been proven inadequate and wrong.

Therefore, chances are we will all be proven fools as science advances. This is not an apology, we did the best with what we knew in 2011.

Only time will tell, as for me, I think it's really funny because most scientists today have not seen what I have seen.

Most oddly they say they respect your opinion but cannot comment on the facts about eye changes or unnatural light....most odd for so called objective scientists?

I have no idea how you are aligning this with some far reaching idea about eye color or what ever, please elaborate.

Quite simply it is impossible for the brain/eye to absorb energy.
And yet the re are eye changes during accelerated sex/brain activity for no apparent reason? As it does during attack mode.
It was always thought this was just increasing light to hone our senses?
Now, given the evidence of reciprocal light and energy through different dimensions, we may think again.


I argue energy is transferred by some sort of EMF pulse and perhaps negative energies from the dark-side are also involved...hence the buzzing exchange of the "vampire"

Any "change" in the iris can easily be contributed to active stimulation, and biochemical sources. To put it bluntly, your out on a limb showing how little you know about biology.

Upir is right the calculation always took into account the variables, only those with an agenda would dismiss that.

Heck, any theory... including those of the metaphysical, is only as good as it is till proven optherwise, or...

another theory comes along.

I for one, wouldn't jump up too quick, to say 'I told you so...' as, "You ain't seen nothing, yet!"

But many are not convinced. Carlos Rubbia, who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1984, said: "I will be very, very surprised that, at last, Einstein will not be the winner."
"What it is pretending to find, in my view, is unbelievably surprising," he said. He says the new finding remains a "very experimental consideration," adding that revealing the results of the experiments to the public this early was a mistake.
If the finding is true, it will have far-reaching implications as the hitherto accepted precept was that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Einstein had said if there was a way to send a message faster than light, then the possibility of sending a "telegram to the past" was real. But his theory of special relativity holds that the speed of light speed was a "cosmic constant" and that nothing could travel faster.
British physicist Jim Al-Khalili said there would probably be an error in the data. "If the CERN experiment proves to be correct and neutrinos have broken the speed of light, I will eat my boxer shorts on live TV," he told the Telegraph.
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/221170/20110928/neutrinos-fermilab-opera-e-mc2-einstein-s-theory-of-special-relativity-minos-cern.htm


“’nuff said!”

wow talk about a break through! did they think it would remain the same forever? im not at all surprised by this news were slowly advancing of course things are bound to change as we discover more

Yes, so true, and like I said history tends to show all the great and learned were actually fools stumbling in the dark.

We should not apologize, in my experience the dark gives up her secrets with a wry grin.

" Here's looking at you blue eyes" ...betting she'll snigger at that, even if it was public.
; )

Today's science benefits from the discoveries made by yesterday's science. Thus, we stand on the shoulders of the wisdom and intelligence of those who came before us. We owe all such previous scientists a debt we can never repay. But the very least we ought to do is not to call them fools; they, far more than we who so greatly benefit from their work and sacrifices, do not deserve such an insult.

I find it so interesting how the metaphysics minded people poo poo science, yet the moment science tips to something odd the same people applaud the research as evidence of their previously unfounded beliefs.

I don't think science is put down that hard, let's be honest, scientists are human and as such bend the rules.

How many archaeologists have discovered artiifacts that they put there ! rather than admitting the hole was empty.

How many meningitis jabs does it take to rig a study?

How many string theories does it take to get a Stanford grant?

If there is a sniff of a long term contract or business shares the scientists will show arsenic is a safe drug.

Anyway, I was thinking more of Marie Curie walking around with pockets full of radium which today we would call foolish....but back then it was cutting edge research.
Wonders if they,ll be many volunteers to dabble with the darkside?

People with unfounded beliefs loath science, science reveals how empty the claims they make are. You demonstrate that well contessa. science will not cater to those with unfounded beliefs.

Excellent points, dabbler.

What Contessa and those like her here fail to understand is that true science is always peer reviewed prior to actual professional publication and, further, if theories are proposed, must then stand the test of duplicate experimentation by other scientists in the field to continually test and try the validity of the conclusions arrived at by the publishing authors of that theory. While mistakes are possible in any field, yet in science any and all such are discovered... sooner or later... due simply to the continual experimentation and exploration by the scientists that follow up on the theories and claimed discoveries of those before them.

Thus, while you find charlatans and con-artists overflowing the fields of "metaphysics" and claimed "psychics", etc., you don't find them in science... because, despite Contessa's strange accusation, archaeologists and other scientists aren't playing to a gullible audience they can hoodwink at will; they must, instead, pass the relentlessly rigorous criteria of their scientific peers... and undergo the criticisms of same throughout their careers. Any artifact claimed discovered must undergo and pass extensive testing on all levels prior to its conditional acceptance by the scientific community. Obviously, there is pointedly NO such carefully monitored testing criteria in place for "psychics" or "metaphysicians" or all others of their pseudo-scientific ilk.


This is how discoveries such as this one re: faster-than-light matter come to light... because science does NOT hold sacrosanct the pronouncements of even a scientist as great as Einstein if and when new evidences based on the continuing progress of science might ultimately call his conclusions into question.

This is why science will always be supremely superior to anything belief or faith has to offer. After all... in belief or faith, whether in a religion or an occult belief or "path," no evidence is ever presented and no dissention or questions of same are tolerated. Thus... there has remained in all such... no progress and no substantiation for its foundational claims.

As always where science, logic and reason are scorned, charlatans make their claims, fleece their believers... and the gullible mutely submit to the sheering while blissfully ignorant of what fools they truly are.

There is just one problem with your reasoning.

When Polled Most leading scientists DO believe in a higher power; God or Gods if you like...my friend is a mathematical genius and she informs me of evidence that suggests super-beings.


so when scientists see all chaotic systems produce order, they have something that explains what science is unable to explain.
First principles, Clarice. Simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius. Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature?

Answer; the defining principles, of balance between matter and dark matter, light and dark, chaos and order, yyng and yang, the list goes on .

Yet you say there are no opposites no conflicts, just what is? I am sorry to disagree but the evidence of a Titanic struggle is all around us.


However, the deeper they look, the answer is always one step away.
Most are smart enough to realize they are being toyed with, are you?

Contessa, you will no doubt be surprised to learn that... due to the evidences I find in Nature, in Life and within myself... I find there is more than enough to logically conclude the probability of Intelligent Design in the Universe.

However, neither this topic nor the arguments I have been making have anything to do with the question of "God." Let's not continue to confuse arguments in favor of science to be arguments against the Theory of Intelligent Design, shall we?

I am surprised as intelligent design means there must be Gods or Goddesses?

Therefore, the "faiths" you vilify are inherent in the very system both you and Dabbler claim for science alone.

Scratches her head..?

You have been "totally confused" throughout this thread despite all efforts to careful explain rather simple logical concepts. At every turn you have judged and openly declared me wrong only to later learn it was not I who was in error... and now you have again strayed from the facts and concluded illogically.

Recognizing the probability of Intelligent Design (ID) does not mean I believe in "gods and goddesses." The latter are superstitious Human inventions, creations of Man in their own image. ID simply means that design by intelligent means appears well-evidenced in Nature and, philosophically in Life. This has not a thing to do with believing in Man's religious definitions of gods or goddesses.

That you continue to jump to irrational conclusions, while understandable given your believer mindset, is disturbing yet is not my fault or responsibility. All I can do is to state the evidences as they are and follow then to their most logical conclusions given those evidences...while you continue to presuppose validity in your beliefs and then try to force all evidences to fit into those beliefs regardless whether they do our not.

I see what is going on….
Science should be searching to prove ideas and create factual data by recreating the event every time.
However science has floors, mainly we only have knowledge of 22% of what the known universe is made of and even less understood. Add into the mix human beliefs and code of ignoring supernatural events, even archeologist refer to Atlantis as the A word and you will not pass if you think it a reality.

Those who have a more metaphysical mind set understand this and disregard science to a level and follow our own understandings based on what we have witnessed or experienced is our evidence.

After all science was born from magic and like most belief systems turns on it’s creator or acts like a adolescent and that is the whole issue I think.

Quantum mechanics is a nice way of bringing magic back to science. As it needed it to move forward.

It becomes evident that those with unfounded beliefs seek to impress others with their claims of experiences. They seek to put scientist in awe.

Why are they so desperate? All they need to do is demonstrate
sufficiently in front of a panel.

Exactly, dabbler.

It's not that scientists ignore the supernatural given that no scientist would ever ignore evidences and/or observations available to them.. as no intelligent being would. It's simply that "supernatural" events end up always boiling down to someone's claim to having witnessed something for which no verifiable legitimate empirical evidence can be provided to support any part of the claim.

Yet even then, a true scientist would not state that such an experience never happened... only that without evidence, it cannot be verified as having possibly occurred (like... no duh!). Of course, believers don't LIKE this, despite the Logic inherent to such a conclusion, and so start attacking science and, by extension, the simple Logic behind all such, for not simply... taking them at their word (?!).

Indeed some people actually see an anomaly that they interpret as evidence of their belief, these very people are the ones who close out any other explanation other then paranormal.. ie supernatural.

Then there are those who completely fabricate their experiences (usually to plug a book)


The whole New Age movement is hell bent on making money, not on social application of the alleged power.

You both cling to the concept we refuse to prove our faith in the supernatural because it is fabricated non-sense.

Imagine there are two monkeys in a cage ( and you are )
You are in a huge room full of caged monkeys and animals.

You are the first scientist monkey, realizing the cage was locked by a Gatekeeper ...would you try to pick the lock?

Scientists choose to pick the lock and upon freeing themselves run to the door, only to discover it is locked.

The second monkey is a little smarter, he knows the cage and door is locked, he knows he is in a high security jail.

Thew next time the gatekeeper brings food, the second monkey is the only one not pulling at the cage. He sists alone and teary eyed pleads to be set free.

The Gatekeeper takes pity, unlocks his cage and swearing him to secrecy sets the monkey free by opening a hidden door in the floor of the cage.

Upon returning, the other monkeys plead for the secrets of freedom, but the smart monkey keeps his mouth shut.

Clarice. Simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius. Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature?

Imagining scenarios are all well and good... if you're either a creative writer or someone who lives in dream worlds (e.g., "believers"). However, for those who prefer to base their philosophy on reality... a bit more than imagining monkeys in cages is needed. I've read Marcus Aurelius and know of his philosophical positions. And while I agree with many of those views, none of these have thing one to do with placing beliefs and imagination over actual observable and/or logical evidences.

As this discussion lies squarely in the latter category, I fail to see the relevance of your monkeys scenario to same. Wanna provide at least a few breadcrumbs in that direction? Thanks ever so.

My response to contessas failed story,


No matter how often the confidence scammers are exposed, those who believe will happily continue to pay cold hard cash to be deceived. The believers are not victims of the miracle workers: they are willing, eager, happy participants in their own betrayal (usually in the form of cash money, real estate, jewels, and expensive works of art). That they can believe that which cannot be believed is a mark of how well so-called "psychics," palmists, spoon benders., etc., know the business of deception. The fact that not even one miracle worker has ever demonstrated, in properly controled conditions, even one "psychic" or "paranormal" ability or phenomena is lost upon true believers--- they just do not care. They would rather believe a lie.

"The true-believer syndrome merits study by science. What is it that compels a person, past all reason, to believe the unbelievable? How can an otherwise sane individual become so enamored of a fantasy, an imposture, that even after it's exposed in the bright light of day he still clings to it--- indeed, clings to it all the harder?

"The true-believer syndrome is the greatest thing phony mediums have going for them. No amount of logic can shatter a faith consciously based on a lie."

© M. Lamar Keene, the world's greatest spirit medium. Quoted from pg. 151, The Psychic Mafia, 1997, Prometheus Books 1-57392-161-0.

You would think that confidence scams would be against the law, right? Well, you would think correctly. However, in the USA such practices are protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and even more strongly protected by over two hundred years of hands-off precedent. Law enforcement in the USA has nearly always shunned bringing religious-based criminals to court to answer for their crimes: the USA government does not wish to appear to be "persecuting churches." As Lamar Keene pointed out:

"To make my renunciation of mediumship complete, I knew there were other things I yet had to do. Seeking out a Masonic friend, I poured forth to him the whole story. At my request he went with me to the authorities. I turned myself in to the Internal Revenue Service for evasion of income tax. (I eventually paid all back taxes in full.) I also visited the FBI, the county sheriffs office, and the state attorney-general. To all these I made full confession of my years of fraud.

"No police investigation of any medium was launched as a result of my action nor, to my knowledge, did the Internal Revenue Service look into the matter of mediumistic bookkeeping. One reason for official reluctance to do anything may be an exaggerated concept of religious liberty. Apparently the last thing a public official in this country wants is for some sect like the spiritualists to scream bloody murder about religious persecution. At any rate, whatever the reason, the mediums continue unmolested.

"As a matter of fact, my former partner is doing better than ever[....]"

© M. Lamar Keene, the world's greatest spirit medium. Quoted from pg. 153, The Psychic Mafia, 1997, Prometheus Books 1-57392-161-0.

This dispite the fact that Keene confessed to fraud, theft, burglary, robbing the dead, picking pockets, and tax evasion ("all in a day's work," as the American saying goes, for spirit mediums).

Do you believe in "psychic phenomena?" Do you believe people can "talk to the dead?" Do you believe that some people can heal with just a touch or a shout of "Praise Jezuz!" or other incantation? Or do you think these things are silly, and yet still believe in astrology, I Ching, chiropractic, homeopathy, or spoon benders?

Alas, if you do, you are a fool. Human beings are increadably easy to deceive. Miracles performed before their very eyes by prestidigitation (i.e. "stage magic") they find entertaining; the same miracles performed by a self-professed "psychic," using the same or similar methods of the state magician, are seen by the True Believers as "evidence" of their beliefs. No amount of evidence to the contrary, including confession by the fraud who performed the tricks, is good enough to sway the True Believer. If you are among these poor souls, well, you have my sympathy, but you must admit you "had it comming to you." After all, you believe the impossible--- shouldn't you pay for such stupidity?

The "psychics," spirit mediums, spoon-benders, and all the other miracle workers believe you should. Imagine the utter contemp they hold for their gullible vistims. As "David" in the movie King of the Gypsies put it, talking about their victims:

"Dey believed 'cuz dey was ign'rant."

And that is the entire truth, in one insightful (albeit poor) sentence. I may as well be the one to tell you the brutal, cold, hard truth: genuine "psychic phenomena" do not exist. Lack of evidence for "psychic phenomena" is excellent evidence for lack of the existance of that phenomena. All a "psychic" need do to demonstrate my assertion false is to demonstrate a "psychic" ability. Not surprising, "psychics" refuse. EVERY TIME. Dowsers fail every time. Astrologers (and I've studied astrology and astrologers for 15 years) fail every time. "Psychics" fail every time. Spirit mediums produce "ectoplasm" (i.e. chiffon fabric) from their pockets and push tin trumpets around table-tops with sticks (in the dark), but they ALWAYS fail to produce any spirits.

"Super-natural phenomena?" It just doesn't happen! If you wish to believe otherwise, well, all I can say is that you're a fool. The real universe is amazing enough without believing it is a magical place where gurus leviated, ascended masters talk to people through mediums via spirit guides, the diseased and the dying get healed by prayer, and spoons get bent by merely willing them to bend. I wish the universe did work that way, but it does not. source Holysmoke.org/keene

Dabbler, thank you for your honesty...I mean...Wow!

To take confession so far? you must be guilt ridden, perhaps even miserable. That will help. I am quite sure there are many liars out there. I am not one of them.

Upir, if you cannot see that this Earth;
suspended light years from anything interesting;

Is in simplicity, by the very laws of its own nature E=MC2,

Which holds all matter conveniently in its relevant time space...

IS Just one big Prison.

I mean have you ever bothered to look at how long it would take a rocket to get to our nearest Star, or nearest Galaxy? It is quite simply beyond mans ability. FULL-STOP.

Scientists just don't like to admit we;re stuck here, it's very bad for their research budgets.

I will put you out of your misery...using our best motors etc to get to the nearest star ...

assuming you had enough food and water...

Wait for it...reality BITES...

" The nearest star is Proxima Centauri at a distance of 4.2 light years. At a speed of 150,000 miles per hour from a passive slingshot maneuver, it would take about 17,900 years to reach this star. At that point, you would then have to figure out some way to loose a lot of your velocity, or you would fly right past this star into the depths of interstellar space."

Welcome to Alcatraz? the "Rock."

If, as you claim, Contessa, scientists didn't want to admit we're "stuck here" then why claim faster-than-light travel is impossible?

If, as you claim (with no shred of evidence offered...as usual with believers and those ruled only by emotion), scientists are so motivated by their research budgets that they can fabricate facts and theories at will and have them blindly accepted by all others as such (as believers and con-artists do daily)... then why claim faster-than-light travel impossible and miss out on the billions and trillions of research grant monies they could have swindled out of us in funding such Impossible space travel projects had they claimed it WAS possible? Yet...unlike the con-artists you defend, scientists didn't do that. Because they couldn't; the disciplines of science...where logic and reason rule over emotion...prevent such from happening for the same reasons I have already explained in previous entries here.

Remember when a team of scientists claimed they had achieved "cold fusion" and were so praised in the press...and were preparing to become famous and receive all amounts of grants and research funds? That is until...as is always the case with science...other nuclear physicists attempted to reproduce their experiments and validate their claims...and it was thus all revealed to have been reported in error. That's how science works, Contessa! That's the built-in safeguards inherent to a system founded on logic and reason and constant verification of new theories and ideas... which is completely non-existent in faith, belief and metaphysics

Proxima Centauri is closer to 4.3 light years away. But I congratulate you for at least knowing enough Fifth Grade astronomy to understand interstellar distances to the degree you have thus far elucidated.

Of course, we know this thanks to the scientific "fools" (as you called them) who figured this out. Had we continued instead to listen to the religionists and "holy men" and psychics prior ro such scientists...we'd still be thinking the stars were instead holes punched through sackcloth preventing us from seeing the glories of heaven shining through those pinholes of light.

Again...how hypocritical of you to call such scientists fools while using their discoveries to attempt discrediting science, itself!

You misquote me all the way through this thread. I refuse to rise to you or dabs little digs, bottom feeding is for dogfish not Eagles.
To name but a few twists,. you state I think scientists are fools?
Not so, I think they will be seen as fools in the future, it was purely a time perspective observation. As we advance, old science, leeches etc seem foolish.

Scientists by the very nature tend to be logical "rigid" thinkers, their biggest strength but also their biggest flaw in my opinion. Most of them remind me of "Savants "in their socially inept ways.

You observe my 5th grade analogy with contempt? yet I was only trying to communicate in terms you could both comprehend.

You say I offered no evidence and yet I specifically mentioned the meningitis jabs scandal and the Isreali false artifacts.

Finally let me turn to light speed. They had NO idea they would stumble upon this, there was certainly no altruism AND THEY REALLY HATE IT !

AS evidently, do you !

Ok- let's try and keep the insults to yourself.

Discussion does not mean insulting others for their comments. State your opinion, and go on. Leave the personal digs out of it.

RELATIVITY IS ALL PRIMARILY BASED ON KINETIC ENERGY.

I don't think it is scientists or people who use logic and emphirical evidence to back up their beliefs, who will be seen as fools but people who base beliefs with no proof.

For example, when Tuscan astronomer, Galileo Galilei saw for the first time the three moons surrounding Jupiter, moons he first assumed were stars. He realised that the 'stars' moved with Jupiter which meant they revolved aroud the planet. Moons. Like ours.

At this time, according to Ptolemaic theory there was only one single center which everything, the universe (We believed) revolved around.

Earth.

The Ptoleaic theory was disproven by the the fact that Galileo discovered mutiple centers and points of motion. For publishing his works, and disproving that Humans were NOT in fact the center of all creation, the Catholic church hauled him off into a dungeon until he recanted his original work.

The strong held beliefs of the catholic church are what caused the science of this miraculous moment, an understaning of what our place in this HUGE universe really is, to be diminished. He was called a liar and dethroned for his logic and understanding, because people chose to 'believe' instead of See.

Or at least, thats how I see it. They made themselves out to be the fools in the end.

RELIGION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SCIENCE.

They can still co-exist.

I believe this point was made before, that science has been more inclined to accept the ideas of the metaphysical and that which they don't understand. More so than believers of things that cannot YET be explained are willing to accept the science/logic behind topics such as Evolution.

They do co-exist, but when God's say 2+2= 5 it will be so.

It does not matter how often the scientists punch their calculators. Gods can adjust their electrons and chips at a quantum level., I think they find this concept difficult to grasp.

A bit like inflation, dark matter and now dark flow.

Seriously.
Why would you say that ?
Do you feel YOU have a better grasp on things Fallen?

Of course.... Fallen that is unless "God's" lay dormant. If there is such a thing. From what we've seen and experienced, "God's" stay as far away from change as they/He/She/Arf! wants.
I promise you there will never be a day when a deity comes down here and says "Hey guys guess what, changing things up a bit, starting with electrons and chips"
Those calculators will give the same results because the reality we live in is unchangeable without utter destruction.
It is not our race to change how the world works, only to understand how it is already functioning. Our equations don't change the environment, and having E=mc^2 not be based on what we thought it was does not mean that the rules have changed.
*bows* i earnestly hope i have interpreted your statements correctly and hopefully clarified any fallacies you may or may not have had.

"The reality we live in is unchangeable without destruction"

True, if 2+2 often +5 there would be chaos which is certainly not in creations interest. Why smash your own toy?

However, there is enough wriggle room, "backdoors" if you like, for very strange things to occur.

For instance, you may place a glass on a solid glass table and if the right quantum circumstances exist, the glass will fall through the table and smash.

Highly unlikely, of course. It is similar to a butteflies wings causing a hurricane, or a singer smashing a glass. One just has to hit the right note at the right time.

The Supercomputing Gods can make 2+2=5 everytime, because they built it in the first place !

This link shows how technically vampires get anywhere and everywhere, well maybe?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9622000/9622751.stm

sir patrick moore says the more we know the more questions we need to aske.sciense is not an infalable guide and i think of a few things fondly beleived for so long seem to be disproven

Science can't explain everything...yet. There are still many things to be discovered. Which I think personally involves on how energy is some how created into matter. It's like if you took an iphone back into the past and handed it to Thomas Edison, he would probably think it was some kinda trick and be confused or even deny that it could exist. Back then people couldn't even imagine what would evolve from science that is now today. Just as today we could discover things in the future that most people would consider impossible.

Science is based on laws of what people believe the laws to represent. The problem is, life always finds a way to prove us wrong in something. Humans put limits on things and life is like "okay, how about this!?" Then something impossible happens.

Everything people consider impossible isn't really impossible, we just haven't figured it out yet. It's all very spacy waycy isn't it!?

It (the neutrinos traveling faster than light), as it is, is fairly useless information, but it opens the door to the possibilities. Possibilities that humans will one day develop technology to travel at speeds exceeding that of light in relatively controlled and safe manners, enabling colonization of very distant planets. Colonization is the only way to escape the inevitable demise of Earth. Sure we could use large, slower vessels as a multi-generational colonization ship, but again, it would be slow and inefficient, how would we know that it would have the supplies necessary to survive hundreds or thousands of years at sub-light speeds. At the speed of light or higher, Proxima Centauri, or Alpha Centauri C, which is approximately 4.24 light years from our sun, would take about 4.24 years which is well within the lifespan of a single generation, round trip even.
Long story short. This finding brings light to the potential to bring other objects to the speed of light or faster, potentially within this generation (being the ones in high school right now) or the next generation.

gotta love dr brian he's so funny and he always over gesticulates!

i'm sure in a few more years they'll discover something else which was supposedly impossible, it happens all the time!

Yes that is just how science works, you push barriers you think you hit "the limit of whats possible" then you break it.

Anyone who claims to know everything isn't a scientist first of all. And science has never claimed to "know it all".

Second, the neutrino event has NOT been validated, it could well have been just an error.

3rd, before you get your panties in a bunch just because we don't know something doesn't mean the moon is a goddess nor that the stars wield influence over our destinies.

As for dark energy and dark matter, quit reading into things. The "dark" is no more metaphysical than the hair on your head. It is simply a descriptive term, something science tends to do...describe things.

Dark energy = the as of yet unknown force causing the universes expansion to increase.
Dark matter = the unknown force keeping galaxies from flinging themselves apart as they should do under "normal" circumstances.

The issue of faster than light isn't that much of a bombshell in reality. During the inflationary period the entire universe expanded faster than light and even now galaxies at the far reaches of the universe are moving at 95%+ the speed of light. Matter can't travel faster than light, space on the other hand can and it does, many times the speed of light.

Multiple universes, dimensions etc has all been under serious research for decades now. We now believe that not only are multiple universe & extra dimensions possible but they may in fact be the reason for our existence.

Perhaps your "alternate beliefs" are nothing more than undiscovered science, as nearly all beliefs have been...except those proven wrong.

What isn't known is not mystical, it is simply not known. And things we may observe that haven't been explained is just that, hasn't yet been explained. Science as we know it is incredibly young and you're surprised that it doesn't have all the answers for a 14 billion year old universe? Please. Science is the tool with which we find answers and nothing more; and it's generally all we need because if something can't be observed, if it can't be tested then any reasonable person must say "it may not be at all."

I cannot believe that mysticism got involved in this thread...

when I got out of it I thought I'd said it all, but no...
it's just been said before me.

Now... I look up at the sun and feel it's warmthh, thinking... this all came from a long time ago.

E=Mc2

Yesterdays majick is tomorrow's science.

And God said "E=Mc2"

And then,there was light.

The famous equation refers to a massive particle in its own rest frame. In all other cases the law is subject to relativistic corrections. This is not at all academic, either. Particle physicsts have to use these relatiionships in calcualting the effects of the fast moving paricles in their experiments.
They didn't call photons "massless", They said only that their rest mass was 0.

In essence E=MC2 is base point of physics and as we learn more we can add to that equation.

For example: If I look at an object which is moving with a velocity v with respect to me, and somehow I measure its energy, in my frame, then its energy will be:

gamma E, where E is its energy in its own frame, and gamma = frac {1}{sqrt{1 - frac{v^2}{c^2}}}.

So if I equate this to mc^2 then gamma E = mc^2 or E = frac{mc^2}{gamma}.

E = T + E_0 = frac{m_0 c^2}{sqrt{1 - frac{v^2}{c^2}}} = m c^2

where T = E - E_0 is the kinetic energy (which depends on whose frame of reference you are in), E_0 = m_0 c^2 is the rest energy (the "energy in its own frame") and m_0 is the rest mass or the apparent mass in the frame of the body (also called "invariant mass"). we also were presented with the out of vogue concept of "relativistic mass"

m = frac{m_0}{sqrt{1 - frac{v^2}{c^2}}} ge m_0

so E = m c^2


In English? E=MC2 is a foundation and of course with the continuance of scientific theories, our world is always going to find out more about the unseen all around us. This is a good thing. This is a marvelous thing, actually. And something to be celebrated.

I was discussing the 'CERN' discovery (or shall we still say 'possibility' at this point?) with Temporary2 back on the 21st of November when more news was release Two Links in Journal

Has there been further developments since that date as I have found none ?

this pertains only to the topmost statements or post in this thread.

scientists never claim/ed to know everything. but i agree they are always in a panic. yes, in a panic to discover new things.

alternative thinkers of course will claim that scientific discoveries are what they have been talking about all along.

Mere words...will make one look stupid. Science on the other hand, backs its discoveries with tangible proofs.

E=MC2 just proves we have a lot of work to do. Scientists only. lol

I think the point was this, the universe is far more complicated than that which meets the physical eye , touch and knowledge of human kind.
Thus, when others claim to have witnessed other living entities, do not be so quick to assume they are delusional.

Even the greatest scientists concede other dimensions maybe very, very different to our own.

A question? why do scientists believe they are the only ones that can reach over the threshold of this our "known" universe, to me this smacks of arrogance.

Keep in mind that these "sightings" might simply be the result of some natural phenomena too Fallen.And to assume that they are some kind of entity simply because we SEE them,smacks of arrogance too.

"A question? why do scientists believe they are the only ones that can reach over the threshold of this our "known" universe, to me this smacks of arrogance."

You might want to look up the definition of science. It's the best tool we have and the only tool for logical people to use. A scientist is nothing more than someone who is educated and uses that tool.

Your comment is like saying "why is it architects believe they're the only ones who can reach out and design a building?" For one they don't believe that (and neither do scientists) but secondly architecture is also a tool used and those that design buildings using math and well known construction techneques are called *drum roll please* an architect!

There's nothing wrong with being an ameture scientist, architect, etc but don't think you have any better answer if you don't use the tools at hand and when the "alternatives" haven't really come up with any evidences of their own that can be replicated or otherwise explained.

And just to repeate myself, E=MC2 hasn't yet been disproven and the whole thing is still being studied.

Goodness, I certainly HOPE you dont have to be labeled a scientist to have a scientific mind. We would all be screwed. =P

Einstein was much smarter than people here are given him credit for. For one, he never said that you can't go faster than light. Only that the mass increases in relation to_ as you increase velocity. But I can assure you that my 200lbs (actually my mass and not pounds) is still going to be the same. Doesn't matter how fast I'm going. And as for this Dark Energy, Einstein did have it in his formula! He took it out because he didn't know what to do with it at the time. There was no need for it in those days. The man knew what was/is happening. Some scientist are mentioning about adding it back in. As for Dark matter, no such thing.

So for in my lifetime I have heard five different explanations of what a "black hole" is. It's always changing. Still no "proof" that there actually is one. Gives the scientists a reason to get the grants I guess. Quantum, string theory, etc. is all guess work. Plus there are particles that must be created first to act weird. I understand that scientist need a working theory first to study the unknown. But sometimes I do really believe that it's based more on getting a grant and the job than "real life." And what's an actual universe mystery.

And don't get me going on multiple Universes and alien vortexs.

BTJ, I'm glad you brought up Einstein. He did think about dark energy. In fact a lot of the theories and discoveries that are becoming "popular" are just extensions on ideas first postulated in the early 1900s.

If you weigh 200lbs and travel near the speed of light to the observer you will appear to have far more mass than when you were stationary and you will require more and more energy to move faster in ever smaller increments. To you however, you'd still retain your mass at rest.

As for black holes, there is ample evidence that they exist. They were predicted but at first few thought they were possible. As time went on scientists began looking at what a BH would look like, ran the math and found out. Then by simply looking to the sky they found many black holes, evidence of them being the effects they have on surrounding space/stars/light that can only be explained by a super massive gravitational object.

Interestingly the first notion of some body having strong enough gravity no light could escape came about in 1783. It was only until 1916 though that a solution to general relativity that could be characterized as a BH was made.

We've detected around 100 or so BH candidates including stellar BHs, BHs in the centre of galaxies and roaming BHs. Then there's the possibility of micro-black holes. All in all there are expected to be literally billions of BH throughout the universe.

Dollars to donuts that they're a mass of something and not a hole to some nevernever land. There's no secret unknown space on the other side of a black hole. As soon as someone talks about parallel universes linked to black holes, the next word they talk about is space travel through them. Whatever phenomena is happening with gravitation forces is happening right here in this universe.

I think you too need a refresher in physics. I've not said black holes lead to some other universe and neither does science. They aren't theory, you can see their effects in our own galaxy, one is 26,000 LY away from Earth.

Do multiple dimensions exist, more than likely, same with other universes and you'd be hard pressed to find a credible physicist who doesn't think there's a real chance of it.

Black holes and other universes aren't the same thing. We can indirectly observe a BH (the same that we can't directly observe the wind but it exists nonetheless). As for multiple dimensions & universes (both different things), we haven't seen one but much of the math predicts it and if you create a universe like ours with 11 dimensions then the quantum world makes much more sense than if you just stuck with the 3+1 dimensions we experience.

Now, black holes with infinite gravity, that could be something different. However, that's just a matter of finding the most accurate definition --in the same vein that Pluto is not a planet- the object itself (super powerful gravity that light can't escape) is real.

If you simply don't believe then I don't care and neither does the universe. Belief doesn't matter a darn. Just try not to make statements you can't back up.

Relativistic mass increases with velocity
http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/109N/lectures/mass_increase.html

Black holes
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57332762/massive-black-hole-gives-up-its-secrets/

http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html

http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/seuforum/bh_whatare.htm

Dimensions/Universes

http://d0server1.fnal.gov/users/gll/public/edpublic.htm

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-scientists-evidence-universes.html

We'll see until the next so-called theory comes out for them. I've been around to hear about several already. And back then, they were all figured out too.

I'm not crazy about so called proofs. 'This & that is happening so it MUST be_' It's BS. If people want to prove something, they find a way to do it. Don't make it so though. Ancient India had many of the universe mysteries known before today's science and they didn't use formulas or poofs to prove it. They experienced them.

Science says that medicine will act a certain way because of the ingredients in it. But practice shows that it doesn't if the patient doesn't believe it will work. But in the lab - it does work. Go figure.

Nobody is going to figure the Universe out by numbers in the lab. I don't care what formulas they use; they're two dimensional and not going to work. Hell, maybe we need another language to describe it other than math?

*likes a lot of jelly in his donuts*

You seem to not understand the purpose and goal of science.

Science is the tool with which we try to make sense of the world around us. No one has ever said science knows everything, it can't, but it does give us far more than we could have without it.

No human alive goes through life without being profoundly affected by something that science has given us.

When we see a problem or a mystery we observe, make theories as to how/why/when and then go about trying to prove those theories. If, after testing and having reproducible results those theories become a part of what we see as truth. But given the nature of the universe no truth can be 100% fully absolute. Science is not a rigid set of "facts" it's an ever growing, adapting and bettering understanding of our world. The word "proof" simply means there is sufficient information that a theory is probably true. In science we use probabilities, not absolutes.

You mentioned medicine. I take pain meds for my condition and science tells us in a perfect system the drug will act a certain way. The problem is no individual is equal to the next, there are differences. So the drug will act differently from person to person. Just because it may make me sleepy but not another person doesn't mean the drug isn't doing it's job.

It's almost like you're expecting too much out of science, something that is very young compared to humanity and the universe. Being disappointed or not understanding something isn't the fault of those trying to bring you answers.

The very reality that theories change is proof that science is working and every day we get a better and better understanding.

The concept of a black hole hasn't changed since 1783. The details you grew up with came mostly from pure theory, with no way to test it, the understanding we have today comes from having empirical evidence.

A theory that can't be proven shouldn't be taken as fact but in time there is little reasons to doubt that every theory will be able to be tested and then proven or disproven. In 1905 Einstein thought the entire universe was basically just our galaxy but that doesn't mean his ideas were wrong. The only thing we know that exists are things that can be observed somehow, so in 1905 the only universe we knew about was what we could see which was basically just the Milky Way. Still, wrong idea as to the size of the universe or not, light still travels at 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum and light will be bent by gravity.

If you're unhappy with the answers then either you are the one with the problem or you should find a way that gives a better answer. Until "alternatives" provide us with answers that can be proven (repeated) then quit acting like you're privied to some higher knowledge because trust me, you don't have it, if you did then you could answer your own questions.

What is unexplained today is nothing more than tomorrows science. It's time for lay people to grow up a little and get rid of their misconceptions.

Remember, it's these theories of light, relativity, gravity, the quantum world etc that gives use GPS, modern computers, lasers, MRI's, medical treatments and so on. There must be truth to it or else it wouldn't work.

Xzav you are sooo right, yet sooo wrong.
BTJ point is that there is a 2 dimensional approach and a lack of thinking outside the box.
This is the problem with computer models, they are programmed by two dimensional beings ( sometimes 1 dimensional nerds) that fail to put in, the could be, maybe, should be, evidence that some see every day.
Thus-
When computer model scientists start throwing in some really random quirky anomalies they cannot actually show are facts (but they have anecdotal evidence of ) they might start to reveal whole new dimensions and even entities.

That equation is assuming the speed of light is a constant. It isn't though. The speed of light is altered by gravity. Kinda' sorta' a fundemental flaw in that theory. Light also has mass. That is why it is affected by gravity.
-Sophia-

@ Fallenstar - I forget how funny you are sometimes lol! You did bring up a good point that the programmers forget to put in the what could happen, what should happen, and an algorithm for searching all the possibilities. You do have to remember that "To Err is Human" and so it passes into computer programs.

Another example of an arm-chair researcher trying to defend the outcome they desire, not the outcome that just..comes.

Humans are not 2 dimensional and a computer program is basically a 2+1 dimension. The quantum world which is where many unsolved problems occur happen with particles that are points, mass or not, they're still points and since we're using a program that is also a point or 2+1 then it should still work. I don't know how else to say that because your argument doesn't really make sense.

I think you're both saying that because we don't know/understand everything then we can't possibly come up with theories and later proofs that are accurate. That's just ignorant.

2,600 years ago basically everyone thought the Earth was flat however one of those simple earthlings (Pythagoras) came up with a theory based on very limited information that the Earth was round. It took many years for it to catch on and it wasn't until the 1900s that it could be proven by direct observation. The same can be said about any theory we come up with now. BTW we don't get our theories from computers, we use the computer to help us do the math to prove or disprove a theory.

I also think it's funny how the "alternative" people love pointing to the Egyptians or Sumerians or Indians (from India) as proof of some ancient super knowledge & how they knew more than we do now etc. But they ignore the fact that without science (archeology) we wouldn't know much about them AND that any evidence we have of what they knew comes from fragmented and limited sources. So it's impossible to know exactly how they did what they did because evidence is often missing.

That way of thinking is also Euro-centric, basically we only look at them with awe because we're only looking at them through Western eyes. To the folks in India they're looking at the West as "those dumbies".

Anyway back to the subject at hand. The idea of extra dimensions etc most people have doesn't come from science but rather sci-fi and pop culture. The additional 7 D's that we think exist are smaller than an atom, they don't hold the mystical entities you're so fond of. There's also a major misconception about the term "infinity". The gravity of a black hole isn't actually infinite, it's just so huge we can't find the numbers. Wormholes etc also aren't taking you to other dimensions, they're just taking you to another part of our own universe (should WHs exist).

People are so ready to say "well because science doesn't know everything and has to change a theory that means they don't know anything and aliens from the Zebulon universe are real." Other than that being illogical it also shows they still don't know what science is about. Do you not realize that you can have multiple theories, theories that compete or contradict each other? And don't you get that through the theory process and weeding out the bad that we get to the truth, or at least closer to it?

Certain theories may be incomplete but if they were flat out wrong then we couldn't make things that work based on those theories. GPS, computers, modern communications, radiation therapy, PET scans, cell phones, etc wouldn't work if they were wrong.

You claim a) e=mc2 is wrong (without giving real proof), b) that particles with mass can go faster than light but you have yet to show how that means science itself is flawed or wrong or how that would destroy the world as we know it.

Yes, sometimes things change but that's the freakin point.

People keep banging on about Light speed, I know that light can be slowed to 4mph through certain crystals.
Xzav, I understand the advances in science and how useful current methodolgy is, but something is clearly missing.
As a scientist, you of all people should be programming in the wierd and wonderful. Why do people on Vr continually claim eye changes and picking up different spectrums through their eyes and brains? Why do people on Vr recognise the significance of low frequencies? Why do some who see this go mad? Why are the spectrums black/red a repeating theme? Why do such subjects have strange dreams, non-linear existences/ flashes of the future? These are the mathmatical equations in the brain we do not understand. Savants do not claim to know how they do algerythms, they just do them...try plotting these into @Big Blue and the computer will just burp...because he was programmed by a one dimensional nerd...Smirks, that one is for you Misfit.X.(No offence Master Xzav but one likes to keep the punters smiling)

Just a side note to help the scientists interested in brain function, Savants are unable to interatct with people. The obvious question is why do normal people divert so much brain power to interaction, empathy etc... It is because evolution has recognised these other functions are far more important, using 50% of the brain to calculate the could be, maybe, should be, parts of our uncertain universe is genetically disireable. Therefore those of us who excel at these alternative methods of function, maybe poor at typical IQ tests but are see and use other spectrums not available to these savants, or indeed normal folks. A good example of this is watching roulette, predicting players cards during Poker...etc. Brain funtion is divereted to calculating the could be maybe should be altering the odds in your favour. I have only ever entered one tornament and got to the final table knocking out all the brightest and best, I quit as it was obvious when I had twice the chips of anyone else. Besides, who wants to be Lab rat? It is a gift, not to be squandered on the mundane. I would rather see those who abuse their position bite dirt, ahem...best not to mention names...

I think in paradigms. I also have an iq of about 170. I was born an auto-didact as well. My iq goes up about 5 points every year. It has maintained that pattern for 15 years now. I am 24 years old. So tell me whatcha' think about that. Smarty pants one time poker player. Lol
-Sophia-

This thread has been automatically closed for length.