Michael Anteski's Ether model

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Michael Anteski, Feb 19, 2017.

  1. karenmansker HSIRI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    327
    Michael: Contributors here always get resistance when their model presents hypothetical ideas that are outside the Standard Model norm.

    When one reduces to the 'why' of any phenomenon, there will always be question marks (??) (unless one communes directly.with the prime, causal initiator - humor here!). My 'simplo-reducto' (my term) is that the only two elements required for any created universe are: Energy and Intent . . . . . most theorists' models would require, at least, the 'energy' component . . . . if intelligence (as we know it) is involved, one would add the 'intent' factor.

    Keep thinking Out-of-the-Box, Michael . . . . .it's a tough road, but worth it! In the future (not yet, sometime) folks will 'Google' "How Simple it Really is" for a better convergent understanding of our universe.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. karenmansker HSIRI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    327
    Is this an original quotation of yours, or have you plagiarized from an undocumented source . . . remember Sciforum rules!!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,275
    There is a difference between thinking out of the box and bat-shit crazy.
    It also helps to have at least a tinsy-winsy bit of knowledge of a subject before you attempt to think out of the box on that subject - it helps to prevent bat-shit crazy....
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. karenmansker HSIRI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    327
    QUOTE="origin, post: 3444615, member: 143078"]There is a difference between thinking out of the box and bat-shit crazy.
    It also helps to have at least a tinsy-winsy bit of knowledge of a subject before you attempt to think out of the box on that subject - it helps to prevent bat-shit crazy....[/QUOTE]
    True, but Michael is not. However, many who would insultingly post such as yours, are!

    BTW Origin . . . . . does your header lead (re: Trump is the . . . ) meet Sciforums standards/rules? . . . looks like preaching/advertising to me!

    ps/ RIP, Chuck!![
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2017
  8. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,275
    You find his posts reasonable? I cannot even decipher what he is trying to say. His posts look to me like they are composed by a random word generator that has been set to spit out random sciency sounding words.
    I think so.
    Who is Chuck?
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2017
  9. Oystein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    890
    I've already named the source in several threads. Know it?
     
  10. karenmansker HSIRI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    327
    Chuck Berry - Died yesterday at age 90 . . . . had a good run! . . . Maybeline . . . . Johnny Be Good . . . among others
     
  11. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,275
    I saw that. One of the founders of rock.
     
  12. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,414
    See your own explanation for your reason why you cannot obtain funding

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,981
    Is your theory/paper available somewhere, where one can read it?
     
  14. Michael Anteski Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    151
    Getting a Paper published in a mainstream science publication, when your material is this different from the "Standard Theory" isn't really possible. and getting an article published in an "alternative" publication doesn't accomplish anything.

    All I have available would be in a few Internet scientific forums, like this one.
     
  15. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,414
    I am sure if there were the smallest nugget of value in your theory it would be investigated

    The investigation may only be checking your calculations to see if they provide a better explanation than what is currently available in the field

    If you have no data to present other than 'I think' that will not be looked at sorry

    Remember those Scientist in the field would get a vast amount of brownie points if they discovered from you a ground breaking theory

    It would be you lifting them up

    With only 'I think' and no data you would drag them down

    If you have written down your ideas/theory have it noterised and lodged in a safe place with carefully attention to note all the details you can about the lodgement

    This might give you some protection if you suspect someone has stolen your intellectual property

    Best of luck

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,981
    Atleast you can upload your paper in the website academia.edu. I have also uploaded my paper there.
     
  17. Michael Anteski Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    151
    I don't think you could have carefully read through the posts I made here.

    My model of ether has no "calculations" or "data." According to this ether model, this kind of ether would be operating via elemental units, much too finely rarified to have been detected by existing quantum-particle or -subparticle technologies. Therefore no "data" could exist yet. (As for claims that have been made, by others in the field, of having discovered some "new method of producing zero point energy," or the like, using the scientific tools and methods now available, I would dispute that as not being possible, because this kind of ether would be beyond our current standard technology to investigate. On the other hand, the ether-test-procedure that I propose doing would not be based on using sophisticated devices and techniques, but rather would use a different type of approach, using natural materials, and mostly just readily available resources, such as earth moving equipment. The key to it would be a basically different approach to getting data on the ether, especially if a new physical effect was discovered, namely producing a decrease in material densities.

    That is why the usual investigative criteria you mention would not be appropriate to prove this kind of ether exists.

    That is the main point in why I propose running the field-test, based on the kind of information I obtained, through my studies in secret codebreaking, as a field test designed to produce, and test for, an ether force-field. As I have said, no financial sponsor has showed up yet, to be able to do it.
     

Share This Page