The Electric Universe Theory [video]

[BaronVonBigmeat]

According to this new theory, gravity is not the primary power in the universe--electricity is.

Thunderbolts of the Gods

Some of the highlights:

* Mainstream cosmology has increasingly resorted to arcane and almost unintelligible mathematics, as well as unproveable theories (black holes, 11-dimensional space, dark matter, etc) to show that gravity is the main power in the universe. According to this theory, none of those things even exist.

* The men behind Electric Universe are electrical engineering professors who point out that electromagnetic forces are a million billion trillion gazillion (etc) times greater than gravity. Cosmologists barely even study electromagnetism however.

* The sun and all stars are not nuclear in nature, but rather electrical, being somewhat like a giant fluorescent tube.

* Most all of the unexplainable phenomena of the universe can be replicated in a laboratory, and the laws regarding how these plasma formations work are relatively simple and have been well-known for a while now.

* The solar system was vastly different only a few thousand years ago. Namely, the planets were far closer to earth. Then something happened to send the planets out of their orbits. The resulting electrical discharges and collisions were recorded all over the world as wars between the gods and so forth.

Thus, the most ancient myths--which when read literally are bizarre, gibbering nonsense--make much more sense. Now that our sky is different, they don't make sense anymore. Many of the oldest religious symbols--which are unexplainably shared by cultures that had no contact (ie, the swaztika, the double helix, the feathered dragon)--can be shown to be a pattern of electrical plasma discharge that occurs under specific conditions. The plasma activity they observed would have filled the sky with light and noise far more impressive than the aurora borealis, while causing severe weather events. Thus, we can understand why all ancient cultures had a relentless obsession with tracking the most minute details of things which today can hardly even be seen with the naked eye. They wanted to keep an eye out for advance warning of another cataclysm!

 

[editec]

Funny,

I posulated just such a theory about achetypal explainations for the world's myths, once, and lost an excellent teaching post because I did.

The darwin thumping atheists running my history department assumed I must be some kind of fundamentalist bent on turning my wards into Christians.

In the last thirty years I see that various sciences, geologist, naturalists, earth scientists, and now physicists are reconsidering what those archtypal myths really werem and wondering if they weren't describing something that early mankind actually experienced and documented for us.

 

[Chris]

Hydrogen was the first element. Hydrogen has only two particles, a proton and an electron, the positive force and the negative force. Everything that exists is a function of that positive and negative force. That positive and negative force comes from the ether. The physicists won't figure it all out until they realize there is an ether out there from which everything springs.

 

[editec]

Hydrogen was the first element. Hydrogen has only two particles, a proton and an electron, the positive force and the negative force. Everything that exists is a function of that positive and negative force. That positive and negative force comes from the ether. The physicists won't figure it all out until they realize there is an ether out there from which everything springs.

One cannot help but cheer on those scientists who won't to bow down to the dogma of their time, and refuse to ignore the anomalies which put into question everything we know.

I find myself thinking: Is everything we think we know actually wrong?

After all, such revelations which upset the ever so carefullly constructed models we make of our universe continue to happen to science.

And I think it is laudable that science not only can accept that fact, but take these terribly upsetting revelations and use that as the engine for continued study.

I do not believe that the ancients were stupid.

I have long believed that there must be some element of truth to the archtypal myths permeating the ancient cultures, and think these are observations expressed as metaphors which were constructed by humans simply trying to describe what people really did experience.

Mankind has a much longer collective memory than history...its found in our religions and the myths which most religions attempted to incoporate into a coherent universal model that ended up as dogmatic religions.

Hell, why do you all suppose I have spend so much time collecting fairy tales and such, and tried to get them into the hands of all the world by having them translated them for people around the world, folks? Fairy tales and those stories we tell our children also have these universal themes running through them, too!

Of course, the ancients' explainations for their universe seem childish to us.

But when one considers how little knowledge the ancients had to work with, and how they lacked the language to describe what they saw, how could these myths appear to us to be anything child-like fabrications?

Still, I recall reading Immanuel Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision in the early 70's, and thinking that the man was probably onto something.

The longer I read history and watch theroetical science from the grandstands where we non-genuises must sit, the more convinced I am that mankind's best science barely has a handle on the true nature of reality.

That's not a putdown of our scientific efforts, or a call to join a religious cult.

It's just an observation from somebody who may not be a carpenter, but who can still see that the table wobbles something awful.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Funny,

I posulated just such a theory about achetypal explainations for the world's myths, once, and lost an excellent teaching post because I did.

The darwin thumping atheists running my history department assumed I must be some kind of fundamentalist bent on turning my wards into Christians.

That seems kind of odd. I mean really, this is such a simple and elegant solution, that explains things in terms of pure science. Occam's razor and all that. Otherwise, you're stuck trying to explain how dozens of cultures all over the world just coincidentally came up with dozens of the same stories and symbols.

The only other explanation then is Graham Hancock's theory of one or more lost civilizations who were advanced enough to export their culture all over the globe. Either that, or the explanation of Joseph Campbell about human psychology and The Hero of a Thousand Faces and all that, but saying that humans are basically hardwired to daydream and come up with this stuff seems like a bit of a stretch.

Also am I the only one who never bought the theory about how the egyptians/mayans/babylonians/etc. made such highly accurate calendars? They went to all that trouble just to know when to plant crops? Baloney! The planting date isn't ultra-precise. You don't need super accuracy, lots of cultures without calendars managed to grow crops, come on. I mean sure, they may have used it for crop planting once they had it, just like you can use a Ferrari to go to the corner store. But they put tremendous effort and their societies' greatest minds into developing calendars and star charts, for the same reason we developed elaborate systems of measuring and predicting earthquakes and hurricanes.

 

[editec]

That seems kind of odd. I mean really, this is such a simple and elegant solution, that explains things in terms of pure science. Occam's razor and all that. Otherwise, you're stuck trying to explain how dozens of cultures all over the world just coincidentally came up with dozens of the same stories and symbols.

Does it? You're obviously not aware of how precarious most teaching posts really are, then. The myth of course being that teachers have lifetimes jobs, when in fact most of them are contracted employees who sign those contracts,( and must therefore toe a rather thin line of behavior and professed beliefs, too) every year.

Or perhaps you're not aware of just how militant many atheists are, and how very much like the religious dogmatists they hate, they really are, too?


Understand, what might seem like an obvious benefit to people like you and me -- having an open mind to new ideas, I mean -- can be very threatening to militant atheists no less than religious zealots.

The only other explanation then is Graham Hancock's theory of one or more lost civilizations who were advanced enough to export their culture all over the globe.

Easily and less magical explanation than that, I think.

Mankind was not once so spread out, and as he did spread out his myths went with him and evolved, but they basically are coming from the same primative prehistory once shared by most of mankind.

Either that, or the explanation of Joseph Campbell about human psychology and The Hero of a Thousand Faces and all that, but saying that humans are basically hardwired to daydream and come up with this stuff seems like a bit of a stretch.

Actually it doesn't seem like that much of a stretch, either, because we are hardwired with archetypes, like crazy. But I think that might be only part of the story of these apparently universal archtypes, too.

Also am I the only one who never bought the theory about how the egyptians/mayans/babylonians/etc. made such highly accurate calendars?

No, you're not.

They went to all that trouble just to know when to plant crops? Baloney! The planting date isn't ultra-precise. You don't need super accuracy, lots of cultures without calendars managed to grow crops, come on.

ESPECIALLY given that the most accurate calendar in the world, that of the Mayans, was created in a land where there are essantially no seasons, eh?

I mean, you don't really need much more than a pile 365 rocks, if all you're interested in figuring out is if it's about time for the rainy season in Southern Mexico to kick in, do you?

I mean sure, they may have used it for crop planting once they had it, just like you can use a Ferrari to go to the corner store. But they put tremendous effort and their societies' greatest minds into developing calendars and star charts, for the same reason we developed elaborate systems of measuring and predicting earthquakes and hurricanes.

Yes! (incidently the first seismagraphic machine is over 3,000 years old and since the Chinese has more than one, they could fairly accurately pinpoint where an earthquke happened weeks before the news ever reached them!)

We moderns have a way of dismissing the fact that much of what our forefathers did couldn't be fully explained as mere religionous beliefs with NO grounding in some kind of shared reality.

It just doesn't jibe with what we know of humankind for a culture to spend that much effort on something with no real return.

I remain very unsatisfied for the proposed reason for the building of many enormous public works projects (the pyrimids, for example) as merely something done to satisfy their cult of the dead religion, although I do not doubt that religion was glommed onto it over time, either.

These people were very sophisticated. they thought about their world no less intelligently (perhaps more so) than we do.

Does it make sense that they would devote their entire society to something so utterly pointless as as these monumental projects?

I mean I can see how these building projects might happen for a while, maybe... because personality cults can do some pretty crazy stuff.

But for thousands of years, and at such a cost to that society overall?!

that really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

I think there's way more to the story of why we see these monumental projects than we, as yet, fully understand.

I don't entirely discount any explanation however absurd it might seem on its face...not aliens, not cosmic catastropy, not even something which we might think of NOW, as supernatural.

Science and the other academic diciplines help us to understand that science and the other academic diciplines are usually wrong, or at best only partially right.

There's more, much more, I think, to the universe, hiding behind the curtain of our current state of ignorance than we can possibly imagine.

With time, and in increments, we will uncover some of these mysteries, which will likely, if history is any guide, only lead us to wonder about things even more mysterious.

Ain't life grand?

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Does it? You're obviously not aware of how precarious most teaching posts really are, then. The myth of course being that teachers have lifetimes jobs, when in fact most of them are contracted employees who sign those contracts,( and must therefore toe a rather thin line of behavior and professed beliefs, too) every year.

Or perhaps you're not aware of just how militant many atheists are, and how very much like the religious dogmatists they hate, they really are, too?


Understand, what might seem like an obvious benefit to people like you and me -- having an open mind to new ideas, I mean -- can be very threatening to militant atheists no less than religious zealots.

Oh I'm aware of how grating and dogmatic athiests can be. I guess what I meant was, the option of "bigass science stuff happening in the sky" seems like the sort of stuff that any athiest would love. "Hey guys, all this mystical mumbo-jumbo is just a stone-age explanation for crazy weather!".

I mean I can understand why cosmologists would oppose it; admitting that the electric universe theory is right is basically the exact same thing as saying "I spent my whole career spouting nonsense. My knowledge of electricity is based on a couple of undergrad classes I had three decades ago. Please fire me." (I think Will Rogers said, "It's hard to make a man see the answer to a question, when answering that question will make him unemployed".) But I guess it makes sense that historians would be threatened too. Still though, it's amazing how someone can dismiss something, when the foundation of the new theory (the planets used to be in different locations) is based on a science that is 100% way outside their area of expertise.

 

[Skull]

A good introductory site for learning the ancient, but now "new" way to think about our Universe:

The Thunderbolts Project™ – a Voice for the Electric Universe

 

[Skull]

Part one of a two part presentation from astrophysicist Clarage:

 

[Skull]

A video of one of ten reasons why our universe is Electric:

 

[Skull]

Reason #2 why our universe is electric: