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 feat 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!