Gravity - the scientists finally begin to catch up...

[Okazaki Castle]

Towards a new test of general relativity?

23 March 2006
Scientists funded by the European Space Agency believe they may have measured the gravitational equivalent of a magnetic field for the first time in a laboratory. Under certain special conditions the effect is much larger than expected from general relativity and could help physicists to make a significant step towards the long-sought-after quantum theory of gravity.

Just as a moving electrical charge creates a magnetic field, so a moving mass generates a gravitomagnetic field. According to Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, the effect is virtually negligible. However, Martin Tajmar, ARC Seibersdorf Research GmbH, Austria, and colleagues believe they have measured the effect in a laboratory.

Their experiment involves a ring of superconducting material rotating up to 6 500 times a minute. Superconductors are special materials that lose all electrical resistance at a certain temperature. Spinning superconductors produce a weak magnetic field, the so-called London moment. The new experiment tests a conjecture that explains the difference between high-precision mass measurements of Cooper-pairs (the current carriers in superconductors) and their prediction via quantum theory. They have discovered that this anomaly could be explained by the appearance of a gravitomagnetic field in the spinning superconductor (This effect has been named the Gravitomagnetic London Moment by analogy with its magnetic counterpart).


Small acceleration sensors placed at different locations close to the spinning superconductor, which has to be accelerated for the effect to be noticeable, recorded an acceleration field outside the superconductor that appears to be produced by gravitomagnetism. "This experiment is the gravitational analogue of Faraday's electromagnetic induction experiment in 1831.

It demonstrates that a superconductive gyroscope is capable of generating a powerful gravitomagnetic field, and is therefore the gravitational counterpart of the magnetic coil. Depending on further confirmation, this effect could form the basis for a new technological domain, which would have numerous applications in space and other high-tech sectors" says ESA study manager Clovis de Matos. Although just 100 millionths of the acceleration due to the Earth’s gravitational field, the measured field is a surprising one hundred million trillion times larger than Einstein’s General Relativity predicts. Initially, the researchers were reluctant to believe their own results.

See why they're so slow? Sitting in skepticism, they think they're being clever...

:mhissyfit: :mconfused: :mmad: :mshocked:

Source (http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html)

Regards all,
Okazaki Castle (buildings have gravity, incidentally...)

[Aodh]

If you just believe anything you see a slight bit of evidence for, isn't that another trap? Personally I'd prefer our scientists err on the side of repeated results as opposed to just deciding if they did it once than it is always true.

[Phoenix]

If you just believe anything you see a slight bit of evidence for, isn't that another trap? Personally I'd prefer our scientists err on the side of repeated results as opposed to just deciding if they did it once than it is always true.

The recent string theory came to change a few things, perhaps we are actually evolving...

yahhaaayyy ;)

[Okazaki Castle]

Well, I personally propose and reckon that you don't need loads of testing according to government or academic approved standards and methodologies to release new technologies and products, for example. And as for their scientific theoris, which everyone hoilds as the new religion effectively, heck, they revise them every twenty years or so, like utterly, if not moe frequently. 'Oops, we were wrong again. Let's call that 'How Scientifc Knowledge Progresses'. In every scientific field of enquiry and 'progress'. Even theoretical physics!! And they say this, and it is public knowledge! Yet do people connect the dots on this one?! No.... That would be Heresy, for Science is Religion nowadays. Or to put that in mathematicla notation, because then it looks more serious and peopel believe it more, because they're programmed like that in fact, I'd say:

Science = Today's Religion

Non-Scientific = Heresy

Thus, I am a heretic. For I do not use scientifc methodology of 'Test it first, then when you're nice and secure use it'. I use intuition and Faith (in my Self). I call that Following the Dark Side. It is powerful. And it is faster. And more hardcore, also, I posit. I would be interest to see hwo the scientists would propose testing and proving or disproving that posit. Let us test their methdology's degree of efficacy and field of applicability...

Regards,
Okazaki.

[Aodh]

Well, I personally propose and reckon that you don't need loads of testing according to government or academic approved standards and methodologies to release new technologies and products, for example. And as for their scientific theoris, which everyone hoilds as the new religion effectively, heck, they revise them every twenty years or so, like utterly, if not moe frequently. 'Oops, we were wrong again. Let's call that 'How Scientifc Knowledge Progresses'. In every scientific field of enquiry and 'progress'. Even theoretical physics!! And they say this, and it is public knowledge! Yet do people connect the dots on this one?! No.... That would be Heresy, for Science is Religion nowadays. Or to put that in mathematicla notation, because then it looks more serious and peopel believe it more, because they're programmed like that in fact, I'd say:

Science = Today's Religion

Non-Scientific = Heresy

Thus, I am a heretic. For I do not use scientifc methodology of 'Test it first, then when you're nice and secure use it'. I use intuition and Faith (in my Self). I call that Following the Dark Side. It is powerful. And it is faster. And more hardcore, also, I posit. I would be interest to see hwo the scientists would propose testing and proving or disproving that posit. Let us test their methdology's degree of efficacy and field of applicability...

Regards,
Okazaki.
You can't prove something which is based purely on subjective experience and mindset, such as opinion.

Personally, I think that ANY developing field from chemistry to astronomy to Mutational Alchemy has the right to release information as it deems it worthwhile. In a field where results can be physically displayed and tested, and especially have detrimental effects if not accurate (such as chemistry or medicine), I feel they SHOULD be tested as thoroughly as they can be. If science hadn't adopted a methodology which enforces repeated results, we would be having plenty of problems. It is this kind of discard of proper research that led to the continued usage of frontal lobotomies in depressed, schizophrenic, and otherwise mentally ill (including many women who were improperly diagnosed in the 1950's) to go on as long and prolifically as it did despite the fact that it caused quite a bit more damage than good, and rarely did much good.

I do have an obvious bias though, seeing as I am intending to major in chemistry and/or biochemistry in college and am considering a career in research sciene.

[Okazaki Castle]

What if the aim of your methodology is precisely to cause harmful effects, perhaps in a targetted way? I propose the QED approach as the best way forward there, because it faster than testing and substantiating the methodology behind it.

Now, if you QED enough in that field, I further propose that you can get people to believe whatever you want, on the simple basis of 'You're next, if you disagree'. It is made all right by also giving them lots of money and lifestyle if they believe as you want them to. I'm working on that side of things, but generally people also believe what they're paid to believe, or what it is in thier own self-interest to believe.

As Mind is creative, Mass Mind or Mass Belief is useful... if properly directed it allows for Physical Manifestations, for example. But also, Mass Manifestations can be effected simply by applying solution number 1 to everybody who believes differently than you, or slows down the process. Thus, the Final Solution, comes first, if necessary, to the degree it is necessary. For if speed is of the essence, then it simply will not do to have mind and methodolgy slowing things down. If they can conduct ALL their tests in the space of 3-4 weeks or less, at no inconvenience to me, then I don't object to scientifc methodology, though I still don't like it. Longer, and I simply view it as in my way. And then it comes down to the Law of the Strong. And if scientific method is weak there, then it falls, and deserves to.

My position at least...

all the best,
Oazaki.

[Aodh]

You're not arguing against science, you're arguing against social conventions.

Manipulation is a personal and political endgame but I don't really feel it has anything to do with ACTUAL fact. We can believe whatever we want but when things can be physically proven, it's another case altogether.

I don't believe we should work on medications for genetic diseases or conditions which are aquired do to bad decisions. I also have a great deal of respect for eugenics when applied to physical and genetic deformity and illness. Just because I believe that, and even if I could get the world to believe that cures for many of these things (or treatments for things such as for cancer) didn't exist, that wouldn't change the fact that they do or can exist. It would just make them of no consequence.

As for expediency of tests well, if you can't know how something works, chances are you don't know enough to make it work. If you can construct an apparatus that works and you don't bother to figure out why, then you run the risk of it malnfunctioning as well as the risk of not being able to develop new technologies due to your own induced ignorance.

If I gave you three weeks to develop an AIDS vaccine, could you do it? Doubtful but aside from curing diseases magically, you could still stumble across SOMETHING. If you by chance stumbled by something that worked one time and did not bother to see if it worked repeatedly, could you give me any sort of guarantee it was not a fluke? No.

FINAL NOTE: If your only intention was to cause harm, then you'd likely only care about knowledge for yourself. Thus, you'd have no reason to worry about time because you have as much time as you exist. There are numerous ways to harm people.

[Okazaki Castle]

Have you considered the possibility that you can make exist what you like simply by believing in it, and focusing on that belief/direction? Thereby, you can even make possible the impossible I contend.

Mankind is limited by nothing so much as their own minds: what they believe is possible. The impossible is also ALL possible, pretty much, it's just a question of how entrenched a belief state is within this Earth system, ie how much karmic weight it's got supporting its continued existence. Hence why it is mass mind and a consensus reality.

That does not mean it cannot be made to change by means of such things as the Laws of Creation and Karma, however. That is how the impossible can be made physical manifested and the physically established can be made to cease to exist physically, and also people's past belief in it to look ludicrous.

Physical belief is no such thing. Belief is a property of mind, and that makes it causal. The Causal plane is superior to and antecedent in causation to the physical plane. Thus, properly speaking esoterically/magickally at least, we should determine physicality using causality, noit causality using physicality.

Regards,
Oazaki.

[Aodh]

Have you considered the possibility that you can make exist what you like simply by believing in it, and focusing on that belief/direction? Thereby, you can even make possible the impossible I contend.

Mankind is limited by nothing so much as their own minds: what they believe is possible. The impossible is also ALL possible, pretty much, it's just a question of how entrenched a belief state is within this Earth system, ie how much karmic weight it's got supporting its continued existence. Hence why it is mass mind and a consensus reality.

That does not mean it cannot be made to change by means of such things as the Laws of Creation and Karma, however. That is how the impossible can be made physical manifested and the physically established can be made to cease to exist physically, and also people's past belief in it to look ludicrous.

Physical belief is no such thing. Belief is a property of mind, and that makes it causal. The Causal plane is superior to and antecedent in causation to the physical plane. Thus, properly speaking esoterically/magickally at least, we should determine physicality using causality, noit causality using physicality.

Regards,
Oazaki.
At one time I held that belief but I've since decided that for me, it is obsolete, inaccurate, and leads to more delusion than gain.

If it works for you though, all the more power to ya.

[Okazaki Castle]

No worries man, sometimes ones magickal workings take longer than was to be expected to manifest more fully. Certainly this is the case if one is especially ambitious, or greedy shall we say, in one's magickal work. Like me, for example, or you also, perhaps?

This is because a greater goal takes a larger web to be manifested. And larger webs take a longer time to weave, or be fitted into place... ;)

all the best,
Oazaki.

[m1thr0s]

Science = Today's Religion

Non-Scientific = Heresythis is an oversimplification Oazaki...true so far as it goes but what of "future science"? Science itself is redefining the nature of scientific knowledge and while it may be a "religion" to some...it is still a "tool" to others, many of whom know exactly how to use it for higher purposes...who understand the creative side of science as well as the clinical side...it's not all about "testing things until you know they are safe..." anymore...if it ever really was that to begin with...

There are many avenues to the "Dark Side" as you call it, but stereotyping a thing and summarily dismissing it on the basis of a false definition is not "Dark"...it's "Dumb" brother... Good Science...Useful Science...Science that transcends the present...is always going to be a blend of raw creative courage and analytical ruthlessness. It's more a matter of holding yourself in check against your own bad habits than of cow-towing to some geek in a labcoat...

m1thr0s

[Dragon]

OK, since it's on the table...Oazaki, what are the Laws of Creation by your...perspective, and are they immutable or not?

[Okazaki Castle]

this is an oversimplification Oazaki...true so far as it goes but what of "future science"?


Or timeless science (http://forums.abrahadabra.com/showthread.php?p=8328#post8328) perhaps? For we are so close to the threshold I'd say that they ammounts to pretty much the same thing...

Science itself is redefining the nature of scientific knowledge and while it may be a "religion" to some...it is still a "tool" to others, many of whom know exactly how to use it for higher purposes...who understand the creative side of science as well as the clinical side...it's not all about "testing things until you know they are safe..." anymore...if it ever really was that to begin with...

Fair enough, I see how they try... but they still move too slowly for this system, ie slower than the system itself moves in terms of the lessons it presents unto them. Hence, they can never transcend the system until they transcend their bondage to scientific thought and methods of thought. Funnily enough, both Time (which is what presents the lessons of the system and that which, therefore, defines the nature of this system) and Science are both ruled by Saturn in traditional astrological symbolism. Saturn also rules restriction. More positively it rules focus. So the conclusion that could be drawn is that they will remain restricted in their minds until they learn how to focus. Which is not soemthing one does in the scientific method. Rather, your mind is wide open to test possibilities. That is to say, you have no direction decided and don't know where you want to go. And until you do you can't leave a time system, can't rise. Gotta know where you're going to use a time system. And if you don't use a time system, then you remain subject to it. Now then, why should Masters (those who can control and move their home system) listen to, or be restricted by, Pawns - those who are subject to their own system? That is the essence of my objection in this really. Primarily because everybody on this planet seems to listen to scientists, which gets kinda annoying when they're so stupid and slow and putting their ridiculous theories out there, eg about condoms and other retarded 'healthcare' practices. And don't even get me started on their approach to theoretical physics...

There are many avenues to the "Dark Side" as you call it, but stereotyping a thing and summarily dismissing it on the basis of a false definition is not "Dark"...it's "Dumb" brother...


Oh, I call it karma, or the AIKI principle: returning unto them what they themselves put out as regards both magick/sorcery and astrology. They don't like that, but it comes down to a question of power: are their systems, with all thier fantastic 3D tech, more powerful than my systems? No is the answer, I would contend. I propose to test this theory scientifically, however. On them. To quote Operation Terra once more:


So now, we give you this warning and we also give you a promise. For those of you who can "hear," know that the ticket is love in your heart. By love, we do not mean the mushy, romanticized stuff of your movies and novels. By love, we mean the absence of fear, trust in the Creator, and a willingness to put one's life on the line for the truth. In a very short time now, those traits are going to be the only ones that gets one the "ticket to ride." A great wave of change is building now that will soon sweep the petty affairs of humans away, a great wave of purification and the cleansing of everything that is not in alignment with the destiny of this planet.

Link (http://www.operationterra.com/Messages/opterra1_.html)

or to put all that in another way: their science is only of relevance to me to the extent that it is useful to me. Its fruits and works are, for the most part, of little use or value to the direction in which I want to take things in practice. Where science and scientific understanding and scientific method/methodology stands in my way then it is WAR. If their position and theories and tools are stronger than mine, they survive that process. Their tools and methodology, and minds themselves in fact, are well within my power and even the power of my tools to destroy utterly, in fact. Hence, I don't mind if they realise this and yield of their own accord, in due humility, unto my goodself, and let us, the Kings and Queens (and Princesses) of The Universe rule this place. But if they stand in my way, as they currently do, then screw their methodology, let us see if they value it enough to stick to it when the price of so doing is death. I doubt they have that degree of faith in science, hence it is weak. Hence it can be broken, which is what I aim to do, and that in turn opens the way to introduce higher technologies to this planet, which is what I really aim to do in this.

Good Science...Useful Science...Science that transcends the present...is always going to be a blend of raw creative courage and analytical ruthlessness. It's more a matter of holding yourself in check against your own bad habits than of cow-towing to some geek in a labcoat...

m1thr0s

Well, are regards good science, I'll let you be the judge of that for you are more likely to be fair and and gentle with them than I myself. Plus they, for their turn, are prbbly going to be more inclined to listen to you than to me, for I am unduly arrogant (in thier eyes) and contemptuous of them too, which people never like really.... *shrugs* :laugh:

all the best,
Oazaki.

[Okazaki Castle]

OK, since it's on the table...Oazaki, what are the Laws of Creation by your...perspective, and are they immutable or not?

Well, it's just a question of the physical properties of a system and how you can affect them really. So yes, they can be changed. How is the question, and is very, very hardcore. There's lots of laws of Creation, but for a brief take on my position regarding them, check out this thread:

Hiten Mitsurugi Ryu (http://forums.abrahadabra.com/showthread.php?p=8331#post8331)

Immutability comes down to a matter of what you can break that can't break you. Verses of course what can break you that you can't break. All a matter of the Art of War really, but on a very personal level (ie without anyone or anything for support, one's own personal strength. Who you choose to share what you gain from the process with however is another question/option...)

all the best,
Oazaki.