Welcome to Tuscoro.com

Read More......


Thursday, April 12, 2018

The Relativity Of Theory

The Relativity Of Theory

Was Einstein truly a genius? or was he deliberately put in place as an intended deterrent of events, a bokeh if you will, with the media of the day, blurring everything else around him in order to keep you from seeing the true genius and events occurring at the time?

Some may wonder what does this article have to do with the overall research? Due to the the last 150 years of intended programing, the age of misinformation, my audience in this will be limited. However I have noticed lately there is a surprising number of people who just can't get enough of truth, it is because of these people, I continue to write the following... 

There are many things in our history which the following is applicable, some of you will see it and some will not, most won't even care... There are many events throughout history, cataclysmic in nature that would be better understood if science were considering ALL things. The text in Genesis of the Bible would be better understood if the true principles of the Earths creation, existence and operation were better understood. Cataclysmic events of the past might be known and understood. The process of diffusion might begin, ridding science of all the fallacies it has indoctrinated the public with being taught as fact rather than the rubbish... er, I mean, theory that it is. Theory of Relativity? Or Relativity of Theory? lets find out...

A hypothetical view of the displacement of stars 
compared when the moon is present due to 
Atmospheric Tide

In this generation we are seeing more and more evidence of a “Dumbing down” of the people, we see an all-out effort to hide our past and a majority of the people have taken notice of this in recent years, some long ago. Would it surprise you to know it has been going on for much longer than you think? Although this article is about only one of the many examples of misinformation that has been fed to the public with an agenda to misinform for whatever purpose, because the majority will buy into whatever crap the academic world will feed them… I will give just a short list of events from the past we have yet to know the truth of or things we have been led away from by an intentional act of distortion or even creations of redundancy and not so surprising, are accepted by the majority as reality.

I must at this time apologize for what may seem as arrogance in my writing, this I assure you is not intended, I am certainly not above it. I am not asking anyone to believe what I am saying only to consider, my weaknesses are many, and I admit, my experiences over the years has sharpened my axe to grind… For the most part I am disappointed with the academics, not so much the people involved as there are many scientists who retain the ability to think for themselves and outside the box, it is those who have succumbed to the system of indoctrination, who refuse to entertain any idea that is not in conformance with the curriculum, these are not scientists, they are puppets.

*The Civil War, what it was really all about and what the South was trying to prevent, no, it had nothing to do with freeing the slaves.
*Every war since the civil war… remember the Maine? The reason John F. Kennedy was really assassinated, ect.
*Manipulation of the original text of the Bible, an act of several occurrences over the centuries, for some hidden agenda… A few examples would be Turning God into a hell fire breathing dragon of destruction instead of a God of love and compassion. A diminishing of knowledge of the importance and sacred nature of the woman, Knowledge of the true identity of the Holy Ghost.. etc…
*Martin Luther Kings campaign for Civil Rights rather than Constitutionally Protected Rights… Why?
*Campaign for Women’s Rights where in the end result was, she has no rights despite what you may believe, and now has privileges instead under the name of Civil Rights which are not rights at all, prior to which she had the rights and protection in Law, under the protective cloak of her husband or father…
*Things of science which our fathers never questioned…. A 3.5 billion year old earth, evolution, plate tectonics and continental shift, polar wandering, the existence of a FIRST Ice age let alone a second one, global warming, Bering land bridge migration theory etc…  ALL OF WHICH ARE THEORIES and the evidences weigh heavily against!
*Radio Carbon Dating, for the most part it can be fairly accurate in “these times” meaning since the crucifixion, prior to the convulsions ignored 2000 years ago, anything prior to that the dates are extremely erroneous. Time being the most misunderstood mystery of man, what exactly is it?
*Redundancy intentionally and unintentionally given, such as “Negative Energy” “Anti Matter” “Anti-Gravity”, would you accept “Righteous Evil”? As a result of the lack of understanding it is still taught today in basic electronics, concepts of energy or the like, the principles of positive and negative, when in fact there is no such thing, there is however greater and lessor. There is no such thing as Anti this or that, however there is “opposition.” And exactly what is Dark Matter, do “they” really know? Einstein is quoted as coining the phrase, E=mc2, and the world marveled without understanding… in short it means, Energy is mass moving at 2 x the speed of light. Is this a statement of fact? Proven, or is it theory? Do you know? My first question… what force caused the mass to move at 2 x the speed of light? And if a reasonable answer can be given, then I would ask, who measured it and how?
This brings us to the subject boat load of crap fed to the people in 1919-20 The Theory of Relativity, when the academics desperate to quash a true genius, the theories of Nickola Tesla, and diminished him by creating a supposed genius (watch the birdie, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain)) which to this day, Einstein’s very name is equated with Genius and the fact is, he was the opposite, he did nothing, he accomplished nothing and quite frankly was incorrect and so is his now renowned Theory of Relativity. Most of you have more common sense than he did. How many of you have heard this title and have never question it let alone tried to understand what it is? It is said today by educated men that this theory is the basis of physics today, I don’t see how, but ok… to each his own.

Einstein’s relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king... its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. New York Times (11 July 1935), p. 23, c.8  (Nikola Tesla)

Some of you might be wondering what this has to do with ancient evidences concerning the history of the Americas which is as you know, what I am all about, and… the answer is, nothing, and everything. The point to this article is to show the reader the degree of deception and fallacies in our science and what is being taught as fact for decades, I mean think about it, the recognized laws of physics are supposedly based upon this man’s findings and the conclusions of Eddington’s Solar Eclipse experiment of 1919 which supposedly proved Einstein’s theory, and it is simply not true. If this highly regarded man and this experiment of 1919 is regarded as such an important feet in our history, to the point many, even those who should know with their certificates of completion proudly hanging on their walls, would argue the point without ever testing it themselves… How much more might we find in our education system at a smaller degree the intentional deceptions whether intentional or not? IT IS ALL THEORY, QUESTON IT! “Wo! Unto he who puts his faith in the arm of the flesh”…

Yes… I have a God… In the following I intend to show you that the results of the Eddington Experiment, were intentionally falsified, and DID NOT prove Einstein’s bogus theory, and I am going to show you how easy it is to prove what so many are so intimidated by and would not think to even try.

When I first was presented the Theory of Relativity in high school if memory serves me, it made no sense to me, just to give you a visual and a vague description, Einstein was telling the world that he hypothesized that space contains mass, and that like a big blanket or trampoline, the earth was supported upon the mass or blanket like a bowling ball in the middle of a trampoline. My first questions were… What is holding the edges of this blanket? What force would that be? If this were to fail or the fabric in which the earth was supported tore open, would the earth plummet into lower darkness and if so, what force is it that would make it fall? Would this then be a black hole?

Example of Einstein's vision

I knew then, that space is void of matter, it is the absence of matter, if there was matter in all that darkness it would illuminate just as our sky does when the ENERGY (Not a proper term) of what we call the sun emanates striking our atmosphere, (Mass) yet receives from a much more distant place… LIGHT is not an energy, it is the manifestation of this ENERGY encountering mass. If space were filled with mass, we could at night, look out into the sky, and see the shadow of the earth like a column rising and extending from the earth out into space, with illuminated boundaries to either side of the shadow. We are told our skies are blue as a result of the LIGHT of the sun hitting our atmosphere, and this is true… except it wasn’t light until it hit the atmosphere… as there is NO light traveling from the sun to the earth, only this energy that is only possible to see when it encounters mass. 

Energy IS NOT the correct term simply because energy is the manifestation of the many forms of the power or spirit if you will… that emanates from the very governing planets and encountering mass. But what is the power, this spirit and by what principles does it exist and extend its power throughout the galaxies? What it is, is begrudgingly called by the academics, The God Particle. It bothers them so much that in the 1970’s they began using the term Higgs boson, receiving its name from Peter Higgs. Anyway, I just wanted to give you some background, keep in mind, there is much more to it, but to have a physicist explain it to you, is confusion as most speak in a foreign tongue and with feigned words. Let’s test this theory, the Theory of Relativity, and see if it is not in fact nothing more than the relativity of theory.

Testing the Theory

After reviewing the entire concept of the proposed experiment conjured up by Albert, Arthur, and likely other motive driven individuals, the basics of this Theory of Relativity, I could see the ignorance of the two men wherein they apparently ignore relativity of two of the key players in the experiment along with other basic concepts. This is where the title of this article was realized… The Relativity of Theory.

The concept was this, if space was like a fabric of mass, a blanket if you will, and the suns presence due to “gravitational forces” disrupts the fabric of space and time (time added in to make it sound really cool) which causes the stars appearance from earth to expand away from the sun because it is bending the light coming from the stars. This however cannot be observed because the light of the sun drowns out the light of the stars, except during a total solar eclipse. So as a result it was decided that during a solar eclipse, when the suns light was blocked by THE MOON, that they could take photographs of the surrounding stars during the eclipse, and compare them to photos of the same stars taken at night when the sun was nowhere to be seen, sounds reasonable doesn’t’ it?

In the following actual image taken during the solar eclipse in 1919 by Eddington, we see the sun blocked by the moon, and six sets of dashes which supposedly represents the stars captured with the inner dash representing the actual location of the same stars without the suns presence. I have never been able to learn exactly what stars were captured in the photo but it is said they were from the Hyades cluster.

Copy of actual photo and negative from 1919

To this day I cannot match these dashes to any of the stars found in the Hyades cluster that is not to say that they cannot be… however the photos are clearly to me, a manipulation and a fraud, it would seem that the person who highlighted the stars did not imagine the stars “fanning” away from the sun and instead marked them as if they had only expanded horizontally. Is this what Albert and Arthur expected? Quite possibly especially if they thought the earth and/or sun is supported by a blanket of space fabric. However this is clear evidence of intended fraudulent and manipulated evidence.

Hyades star cluster

The Photo Experiment of 2012

In a document I wrote some time ago concerning this very thing, I made the statement within, and after what could be very easily be considered as an arrogant boast, that it would not be too difficult to prove Einstein’s theory incorrect. After re-reading this, I decided I best put my money where my mouth is, because I am just a simple minded high school dropout. So I decided to begin the process of conducting my own experiments to show that in Albert and Arthur’s experiment that certain factors of relativity, were not considered. Of the things I knew were ignored were the moons participation in the experiment and its role in the final outcome, also the earth it self’s role in the experiment or more precisely what has come to be known as “Atmospheric Tide” You see, I knew I would get the same results as Arthur Eddington, without the participation of the sun whatsoever in my experiment. I knew that IF Eddington truly got the results he did, and I have just somehow misunderstood the result, that his results were not because of the Suns presence in his experiment, but as a result of what they did not consider in the slightest, the moon and atmospheric tide.

With this I contacted several experienced in astrophotography and even one astrophysicist, all of which assured me that Eddington’s experiment has been checked and recheck several times since its conception, and all obtained the same results, then I agreed that this is likely true, but then I asked if anyone conducted the same experiment with the sun nowhere in the equation? Some stuttered but others with more confidence assured me that it had been done and that no expansion of the stars was observed. I must admit I was somewhat intimidated and tempted to abandon my experiment. But I pressed on.

I contacted a professional camera man who has elected to remain nameless, I understand his reasoning to remain anonymous, perhaps someday when it is no longer a potential seeming scar in his profession, he is welcome to step forward and accept his part in the experiment.

There is only one thing I would do differently and yes I plan to do this again someday, but what I would do is select a date where in the moon is present but as a New Moon and not a full moon simply to get more visibility of the stars, however this oversite did not affect the results.

A date was set to take both photographs and it was decided to take the photos in the constellation of Taurus, the first was to be taken at approximately June 6th 2012 at approximately 11:00 PM. The second photo was to be taken at the same time two weeks later with the moon on the opposite side of the earth on June 19th 2012, both photos taken from the same camera, same settings, same location and same constellation location. Although I have the original photos, in order to create images here to be seen clearly, each photo has had brightness and contrast adjustments to enable better viewing of the stars and the overlay photo has had key stars highlighted by placing a 15 pixel dot over each.

The following images are best viewed on a computer screen

 June 6th 2012 Highlighted

June 19th 2012 highlighted

Results of first Overlay 

2018 overlay using original 2012 photos
with contrast and brightness adjusted

Using the two photos in Photo Studio Deluxe, I experimented in many ways to align the stars WITHOUT enlarging or stretching the photos. I decided the best point or center point for alignment would be where the moon is, the result was a fanning away from the moon. In other words, when the moon is in view, it causes the earth atmosphere to distort giving the appearance of an expansion, it is the same as increasing the natural parabolic arch of the earths atmosphere as a result of the oxygen, hydrogen, and other elements being drawn towards the moons presence, in the very same way the tides of the ocean are… This is the results of atmospheric tide, and when this natural lens is distorted, it will expand the view of stars appearing to fan away from the moon in a comparative overlay.

THIS is what was observed as a result the Eddington Experiment, and it had NOTHING to do with the sun, it was a simple change in the refraction of light as a result of this distortion caused by atmospheric tide due to the moons presence. LIGHT DOES NOT nor will it ever bend, light does not exist in the vacuum void environment of space. Space is VOID entirely of matter and without matter light cannot exist. light is ONLY possible when this power, spirit, God Particle, Higgs boson, whatever you wish to call it, encounters mass! that energy that emanates from a presumed governing center of the galaxy, or even the center of the universe, but…  is there something even larger? It would seem those hailed as a result of this Theory of Relativity, forgot about the relativity of the moon and the earth… Conclusion, Einstein was wrong, don't tell me I'm wrong, show me I'm wrong, it wouldn't be the first time...

PS… Many in the past have sent me every sort of youtube video supposedly showing the bending of light, in this they are deceived, it is whether you see it or not, the results of REFRACTION due to a realigning of the natural prism of molecules (Matter) which is NOT the same as bending, it is no different than if you took a few mirrors and manipulated the direction of a laser light or light of the sun using mirrors.

The Next Experiment

As I learn more and more about what the academic believe is fact, I only wonder more… In my experiment I chose to take one photo with the moon present in Taurus and then two weeks later one of Taurus with the moon opposite on the other side of the earth. According to science, it is shown that an equal bulge of the earths atmosphere occurs opposite the moon side, on the other side of the earth, so why in my photo results did I get and expansion of the stars? The next experiment is to repeat the previous with two changes, again I will choose the date in which the moon is in Taurus, but this time the New Moon. And the second photo with the moon NOT 180 degrees, but 90 degrees from the former. Will a more profound expansion of the stars be the result?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for your comment!