> Okay back to basics. If we can get beyond concrete
> mixing with a bucket and shovel:)
> Four states of matter..
> Solid, Liquid, Gas, Plasma.
> It's fairly easy to put all matter through the
> first three stages through molecular agitation
> because at some time in the past we figured out
> how to make and control fire.
> Plasma is more difficult.
> Is there another way?
> Hi Jon
> During my 2 decade + career in oil and nat gas
> process fabrication,
> Ran a CNC plasma gantry. ...underwater cut...50
> ton remote control cranes.
> Ran on cryogenic Nitrogen.
> Part of my daily duties was metallurgy
> inspection...go thru the numbers of the contract
> via math .
> Also did Ultrasound inspection on steel and alloy
> Just like Ultrasound to look at Baby.
> It's heady stuff to recognize the plate is in
> atomic vibration resonance.
> One can change Atomic structure with heat and
> explosive force. ...a more subtle form of access
> is possible.
> You dial in via frequency. ...possibly this is the
> Pervue of Harmonics and Phase.
> Kind like Shields in Star Trek Voyager or Stargate
> TV series.
> We play around with similar phasic signature
> It's different than Atomic collider ...like CERN.
> It's also Electric Universe ...they seem joined at
> the hip.
> What's really heady (pun)....is Thought and
> Dimensional vibration.
> Thought is faster than Light...
> Thought is Quantum. ...can access the
> Phasic/Vibration reality of the atomic bond.
> We can see** into the atomic lattice!
> Can we change the Atomic to reshape it by our Will
> ?....become God's? .
> It's realistically just Science Law**... : )
> Mythology and sound levitating large blocks. ..
> Stories of blocks moving thru the air to
> Ya...I know ancient people were high on mushrooms
> to Marijuana,
> Yet the Mythology seems to have a Candid
> definition of function which is right up there
> with our present Sci Fi novels/Movies.
> The Movie Dune is fabulous journey into Sci Fi and
> T Bird
There's definitely something to that general principle. One problem that tends to defocus it is that too many people jump on the bandwagon and distort it into things that drag a pure concept way off road into the swamp. For example, the Coral Castle can be explained by classical mechanics; no need to conjure up the notion that Ed was somehow mixed up with some anti-gravity force field. One quick visit to the site clears up any doubt or confusion.
The thing that drives new discovery is often the need to overcome a challenge. Few discoveries are made without humans being confronted with a problem they need to solve. One problem we have in studying ancient stonework is that we unfortunately already know how to make tools that can quarry granite or lathe a column, and it's very hard for us to unremember that, to wipe our minds clear, and to try to start from scratch to develop the testing, prototypes, etc. that would solve such problems.
But one look at those bizarre stone formations in the Andes, or certain structures in Egypt, Baalbek, etc., reveals that intelligent life didn't always think like we do today. They had a different logic, a different approach to problem solving. And it's very challenging for us to try to think like they did so that we can figure out how they did things.
We don't really know what problems the original builders encountered that inspired them to do that stonework. Was it massive floods and earthquakes that inspired those seamless walls made of bulbous rocks in Peru and the enormous 2000 ton megaliths in Baalbek? Was it astronomical doom, intergalactic war, or enormous draught that inspired the pyramids? Was there one or more sophisticated technological civilizations on Earth untold millennia ago, that were far more intelligent than modern humans, who needed a long-term solution for an imminent disaster? Did Earth pass through some unknown energy/plasma/ether field that turned anything with a brain into a 10x genius?
If I have any "bias", it's that I'm generally biased against orthodoxy, mainly because history shows that adhering to orthodoxy prohibits discovery, and"orthodoxy" is not how Nature works. Orthodoxy constrains adaptation; it keeps us in the dark by propagating early, simplistic, undeveloped notions about the way things are and imposes inertia against improving or developing the notion any further.
A bias against orthodoxy produced Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, Einstein, and Tesla. Without such "bias", we'd still be wearing loin cloths lighting fires in caves. So yes, I do have a bias, and it's a bias to consider the unconsidered and to question mainstream at every turn. Only in that way do I see a path that leads us to the facts and the truth about our origins.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?