Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

And Now For Something Completely Different.


Recommended Posts

Thoughts???

There's some good science and more than one or two very odd coincidences in amongst it, BUT some of the analogies are a little tenuous. On the whole though it seems to fit very well with observation, probably better than our "normal" model as it stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The video lasts about 90 minutes and I don't have time to look at it, but I did take a look at the website of Nassim Haramein's "Resonance Project" where it is claimed that "As early as 9 years old, Nassim was already developing the basis for a unified hyperdimensional theory of matter and energy, which he eventually called the “Holofractographic Universe.” "

Apparently the Black Whole finds "parallels between his theory, sacred geometry and codes found in monuments and ancient documents."

Personally I'd call it amusing junk pseudo-science, and presumably a nice earner for Nassim Haramein, whose DVDs are on sale from the website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did watch it start to finish, it was cloudy and nothing on T.V. that was any better. It does provide more science during the middle, more hippy mumbo jumbo towards the end.

If you do find the time to watch it I'd like to know where the flaws are. I'm not saying that it's time to dismiss current thinking, BUT his theories do appear to hold up to observational data. He also come up with ONE way to mesh quantum and classical physics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a (very) quick look at the video, and a (slightly) longer look at his paper "The Schwarzschild Proton" which seems to be his main idea.

http://www.theresonanceproject.org/pdf/schwarzschild_proton_a4.pdf

He starts with vacuum energy. In quantum theory a prediction arises that the vacuum should have a very large (or indeed infinite) energy. This idea has been picked up by lots of fringe scientists claiming that we could somehow tap into this energy; more conventionally it's supposed that this energy isn't physically observable except in particular situations (e.g. the Casimir effect).

Zero-point energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Haramein, on the other hand, takes this vacuum energy as physically meaningful, calculates how much of it would be inside a proton, and concludes that a proton must be a black hole.

You might ask, what about all the vacuum energy outside the proton? I think he maybe asks that later on and concludes that the whole universe is a black hole. But then you might ask why there should be any difference between what's inside a proton and what's outside. To me it looks like junk.

Anyway, he gets this idea that a proton is a black hole. He then does some calculations he calls "semi-classical", applying Newton's laws to protons. This really is just junk: if protons were black holes then you would need to use general relativity to describe their short-range interactions, and if protons aren't black holes but really are what we think they are, then their gravitation is insignificant compared with other forces.

He does some calculations and gets a figure popping out that is apparently comparable to the estimated mass of the observable universe. This is his big inexplicable coincidence that becomes fundamental connection, I think.

In that case what he's doing is not unlike what Eddington did many years ago, when he argued that there was a connection between the number of protons in the universe and the strength of electromagnetism.

Eddington number - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dirac did something similar with his "large numbers hypothesis"

Dirac large numbers hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Eddington was a great physicist but his "fundamental theory" has always been considered junk; Dirac's hypothesis was disproved by observations. When you play with numbers you can find connections between everything. That, it appears, is what Haramein is doing.

Most of the info I can find about Haramein comes from his own self-promoting "Resonance project". One blogger seems to have taken rather more time over Haramein's theory and activities than I have.

Up: What's so misleading about Nassim Haramein?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guy thinks the same as me. Has asked the same questions, has observed nature, and goes back to simple pure logic.Brilliant!!!

If you guys do not understand him it is because you have been conditioned in a certain way of thinking all your lives. Pure genius.So simple even a 10yr old would understand. You should be able to derive all facts of science from simple principles and thought experiments.

Acer the way we observe the micro scale maybe distorted by the shape of the universe. It may be vortex shaped in 4D, with the tip, the singularity located in the sub atomic world.

A particle like an electron can be seen to be spread out everywhere in the same way as an heavily out of focus star in a telescope. A region of space collapsing on itself at relativistic rates may observe the universe to be much smaller in one direction because of Lorenz contraction under acceleration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.