Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Japan to host international particle smasher

Posted 1 year ago on Jan. 1, 2013, 2:45 p.m. EST by ivyquinn (167)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

34 Comments

34 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I love physics
I am a scifi addict
I have a degree in nuclear physics
I hate the idea of spending money on projects like this & space when the Earth is so desperately seeking solutions for PEOPLE


peace - food - health - environment


after these problems are solved, build this toy!

[-] 3 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

I agree. With your points.

What really needs to be investigated is magnetic energy through Tori frequencies.

This article however does address how unsafe other particle accelerators are.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

unsafe??? Tori frequencies????

[-] 2 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

Other particle accelerators utilize protons, this accelerator uses electrons to generate energy.

Double Torus structures. Are you familiar with Nassim Herimein?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I never heard of Nassim Haramein


One of the people whose views the Thrive movie showcases is a man named Nassim Haramein. A caption on the screen identifies Mr. Haramein as “Cosmologist, Inventor.” Beginning at 12:23 in the film, excerpts of interviews with Haramein begin and continue for almost the next ten minutes. Mr. Haramein opines on questions of astronomy and ancient history. Even before Thrive, Mr. Haramein was well-known in New Age circles. This article will evaluate what Mr. Haramein claims in Thrive, and also try to answer the question, who is he?

What Does Nassim Haramein Claim in Thrive?

In his first appearance in Thrive at 12:23, Nassim Haramein appears in the context of the discussion about the “torus” design which Thrive creator Foster Gamble believes is the key to free energy. Mr. Haramein refers to “big arms of galaxies spinning around” and a claim is made at 12:34 that the galactic halo is shaped like a torus. A little later, at 16:12, Mr. Haramein appears again, talking about the Osirian Temple in Abydos, Egypt. This discussion occurs in the context of the “Flower of Life” design that Foster Gamble asserts is of extraterrestrial origin. At 16:32 of the film, Mr. Haramein states that the Flower of Life at the Osirian Temple is “burned into the atomic structure of the rock in some extraordinary way.” No backup is given for this claim at all. In fact, this claim is false. It is the only factual claim that I know of, to date, which the Thrive creators have retracted.

Mr. Haramein continues to appear sporadically over the next few minutes. He appears again at 18:20 talking about the Forbidden City in China, “where the sun gods reside.” Later still, at 20:10, Mr. Haramein again refers to “sun gods” from Egyptian, Incan and Mayan culture who supposedly came to earth and taught ancient peoples engineering, writing and science. This is clearly an assertion that “ancient astronauts” are supposedly responsible for great feats by ancient civilizations, who were mistaken by these civilizations for “sun gods.”

At 21:25, Foster Gamble states that “Nassim has impressive evidence to back up his theories.” He does not state what this “impressive evidence” actually is.

Is Nassim Haramein Right About the Things He Says in Thrive?

Not very much of the time. A lot of what Mr. Nassim states in Thrive is simply false. On this blog we have already debunked much of the material he presents. For example, we’ve already noted that his claim about the “Flower of Life” in the Osirian Temple is incorrect. It is not “burned into the atomic structure of the rock.” In this article, which debunks the idea of “ancient astronauts,” I explain at length how and why Mr. Haramein’s assertions about ancient civilizations and ancient history are wrong. For instance, the Egyptian and Mayan “sun gods” had nothing to do with science or engineering. A case can be made that the Incan “sun god” did supposedly teach some knowledge to the Incas, but the context in which Mr. Haramein employs this idea—supposedly to illustrate that “ancient astronauts” exist—is totally incorrect. There is not a single piece of evidence anywhere in the world indicating that aliens visited ancient civilizations thousands or hundreds of years ago. The only basis for the “ancient astronaut” claims is the supposition that particular structures, such as pyramids, were beyond the capability of ancient peoples to construct, and therefore they must have been built by aliens. As I explained in the article debunking ancient astronauts, that supposition is totally unsupportable. Furthermore, he’s also wrong about the Forbidden City being “where the sun gods reside.” The Forbidden City, built in Beijing in the early 1400s, was where the terrestrial emperor resided, not the “sun gods.”

Who is Nassim Haramein?

The subject that concerns the bulk of Mr. Haramein’s testimony in Thrive is ancient astronauts. He is clearly identified with that theory. In fact, while this article was being written, in late February 2012 yet another YouTube video popped up of Mr. Haramein claiming that certain archaeological artifacts “prove” ancient astronauts existed. These claims are no different than the basic gist of his claims in Thrive. All proceed from an assumption that “ancient peoples couldn’t possibly have created this!” because whatever is being examined is judged from the standpoint of modern technological and scientific understanding.

However closely he’s associated with ancient astronauts in Thrive, this theory is not Mr. Haramein’s main claim to fame. Who is he, then and what his he known for?

According to the bio that appears on his own site—for the Resonance Project—Nassim Haramein was born in Switzerland in 1962 and began developing, at the age of nine, a “hyperdimensional theory of matter and energy.” His bio goes on to state:

“Haramein has spent most of his life researching the fundamental geometry of hyperspace, studying a variety of fields from theoretical physics, cosmology, quantum mechanics, biology and chemistry to anthropology and ancient civilizations. Combining this knowledge with a keen observation of the behavior of nature, he discovered a specific geometric array that he found to be fundamental to creation and from which the foundation for his Unified Field Theory emerged.”

Mr. Haramein often gives lectures at conferences, and you can see many of his talks on YouTube. The topic he lectures on most often is something called the “Schwarzschild Proton,” which we’ll get to in a minute. I find it interesting that neither the Thrive movie nor Haramein’s own website list any degrees or credentials. That is noteworthy, because people who do have degrees or credentials and who are interviewed in Thrive are usually presented with a title card on-screen that lists what their credentials are—example, “Dr. Jack Kasher, Ph.D.—Professor Emeritus of Physics, University of Nebraska” (31:01). I have also not been able to locate a C.V. (curriculum vitae), sort of an academic résumé, for Mr. Haramein. If anyone is aware that he has advanced degrees in physics or other relevant fields, please pass on the information to me and I will gladly add that to this blog.

What Is the “Schwarzchild Proton” Claim?

This blog has already debunked what Mr. Haramein claims in Thrive, both in this article and the previous articles. Let’s move on to some of the other claims he makes other than the ones in the film. Although the focus of this blog is on the film, Mr. Haramein’s other claims are relevant to judging his overall credibility as a source on matters of science and ancient history.

The “Schwarzschild Proton” theory states that a proton is really a miniature black hole. I am not trained in physics, but what I do know of it, this assertion is completely outside the realm of science as we understand it. Needless to say, the scientific community is not impressed by the “Schwarzschild Proton.” In fact, it’s very difficult to get a scientist to spend their time debunking it. Nevertheless, there are scientific opinions about Mr. Haramein’s theories. Here’s one, a fairly high profile blog called “Up,” which ran several articles about Mr. Haramein and his various theories. The creator of this blog, Bob (also known as Bob-a-Thon), had this to say about Mr. Haramein and his paper:

His overall argument is circular, which means it shows nothing. A hypothesis is presented that a proton might be considered as if it were a black hole, and his first conclusion, after a few pages of equations, is that the forces between them would be very strong, like the forces in a nucleus. But this goes without saying! If you pretend that something is as heavy as a thing can be, then it shouldn’t come as a surprise to find that the forces would be as strong as a force can be. There’s no significance in this whatsoever.

His theory implies that the nucleus of a single atom of hydrogen has a mass of nearly a billion tons. This does seem a bit silly – but theoretical physicists do hypothesise apparently silly things sometimes, so that’s not a deal-breaker. For obvious reasons, though, you need a very convincing reason to do something like that, including an explanation as to why we never measure this huge mass when we weigh hydrogen (or anything else), and none is given.

The paper, while using some scientific terms, is presented at a very basic level. This could be considered a plus – all scientists would agree that there’s nothing better than a simple theory, if it works. But Nassim is merely playing with equations from student textbooks (these are the only references cited in the paper), things that have been explored thoroughly for decades, and he’s using them in a pretty simplistic way. It’s unlikely that he’ll find anything that hasn’t been found before by doing this. What he has found is some values for things that look suspiciously like what he knew when he started. This is often what happens when you go around in a circle.

It’s a bit of a joke to claim that anything profound can come from this kind of thing. But again, it looks cool, and it’s clearly enough to impress a lot of his followers.”

Bob went on to post a lengthy scientific debunking of the Schwarzschild Proton theory. You can find it here. I won’t reproduce it here because it’s full of a lot of very specific scientific jargon and equations that I don’t think I need to show here so long as it’s available at the link. Suffice it to say that Bob’s blog makes a strong argument that Mr. Haramein’s theory does not have any validity when judged against actual provable science.

[-] 2 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

This blog also discredits intellectual thinkers and those that believe in other governmental conspiracies.

However if you do wish to debate his theories here is a great paper to focus on

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

[-] 0 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

sounds about as real as Erich von Däniken

[-] 1 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

What's your stance?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I stand with reality and science

[-] 2 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

Nasa found a double torus structure that backs his research up

http://freedom43tv.com/2012/12/11/nasas-fermi-telescope-finds-giant-structure-in-our-galaxy/

What's your stance on this? His theories and research are sound.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

try again - the words "Nassim" & "torus" do not appear in the article

[-] 1 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

Does that matter?

Nasa obviously supports subversion of truth and misleading the public on science. However, this structure is a double torus.

How can you discredit that?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I give up
bye bye

[-] 1 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

I'm sorry we couldn't get on the same page. Peace be with you.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

accelerators USE magnetic fields to send particles at close to the speed of light
the USE power - they do not GENERATE check Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity

[-] 1 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

This is true, however if you read the article that is addressed.

Again have you heard of Nassim?

[-] 2 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Slamming atoms together would create energy, theres no doubt about that, but would it create more energy than it took to smash em, right?

What about the plasma generators that spin em all in a circle. Those create energy I believe.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

any transformation of energy "costs"

accelorators use HUGE amounts of power to smash a tiny number of particles together.
Scientists study the "output" of the "smashing" to syudy the nature of matter. Intellectually amazing - but produces almost no practical benefits. An accelerator can cost $100,000,000++++ a big waste. Plasma is the "fourth" state of matter - after solids, liquids, gasses. Plasmas are created by very high power lasers - again used to discover the nature of matter at very high temperatures such as in lightning and in stars and nuclear fusion

[-] 1 points by ivyquinn (167) 1 year ago

Both are valid and efficient forms of energy production.

[-] 2 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Nuclear physics huh? Are you currently working in a lab? Thats some pretty cool stuff. My girlfriend works in an alternative energy lab @ USF, still working on doctorate.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Revenue is needed to provide solutions for desperate people. Increasing levels of revenue can be generated by implementing new scientific discoveries into our economy. Space is the most demanding "laboratory" and so creates the greatest number and most significant quality of scientific discoveries.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

for all of the space research that produced things like lasers, money spent to improve battery technology DIRECTLY
money spent to improve environment technology DIRECTLY
money spent to improve education DIRECTLY
will be much more productive
and much less exciting

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

But we have already performed this experiment, and found that money spent on space exploration provides a ten fold return in terms of economic development. Basic research, that is not application oriented, has produced tremendous gains for the economy.

The experiment will continue. America is investing less and less into its space program, while Asian and South American countries are investing more and more. These poor countries see a space program as an important way of lifting their people out of poverty. As the experiment continues, we will see what the results turn out to be.

That is, if we allow ourselves to have a future.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Where's the bottom line?

That's the only thing that predatory capitalists are interested in.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Can't argue with you even though I have hung on every god particle story from the European cern particle accelerator. i also cur my teeth on Sci fi but no degree.

Ta

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

high tech & particle physics & radio-isotopes attracted me to physics but I landed in computers - the first micro-computer system

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Wow. I started in 1980 working on a Data General mini computer, Nova class as I recall. Largest disk drive we had was 192mb and the disk drives were called washing machines because of their look, size, and wobble.

Memory for the entire machine was not even 8mb. It was amazing to experience the next 30 years of computer progress.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

The first micro-computer commercially available was an 8KB machine based on the Intel 8008 - before the 8080
It used an 8" floppy disk & plasma screen - in 1972
a few yeas later we networked multi-systems together and used a 54MB "hard" drive and a multiplexor so many PCs could access the data base I developed a complete banking application for it in PL1 We sold systems around the world, but because we were not compatible with IBM - since we were on the market before them - we failed many years later

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (356) 1 year ago

Got you beat: I did my early work with vacuum tubes based computers, then with punch cards, punch paper tape. Some fun back then, huh?.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

The Q1 computer was the first commercially available MICRO COMPUTER based on a micro-processor Before that , I did work on "mini" computers that did use paper tape & punch cards - but I do not know the processor technology. It was a typ ical "mini" from the 60s-70s You might appreciate this - a salesman came into the office that he sold one of our systems to a company that was going to use it to do its inventory - it was configured with three mag-tape drives - one for old inventory, one for keypunched updates and a third one to produce the updated (merged) file.
The boss was really pissed because he could not deliver the system described with 3 mag tape drives - so he subsitituted PAPER tape "drives". Inventory took over 100' of paper tape!

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

We did utilize 8" floppy to boot the box, but we (Lewco securities brokerage @ 2 broadway) quickly upgraded to the DG Eclipse system with 277MB disks

I didn't see my 1st IBM AT pc until '82 I think. Never programmed myself (some shell scripting)

Ops, sys admin, & mgmt. was my path.

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (356) 1 year ago

IBM AT. Forgot the name of that one. But back years before that, we did bread board work to make and test JK flip flops, etc. all binary stuff, no bytes. Then later you hoped your punch cards were right. The early years.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

As a messenger between ADP @4NY plz & 2 Bdwy in lower manhattan I remember dropping a set of punch cards, rubber band popped, thousands of cards to put back in order.

Wow what a feeling that was, stomach dropped, thought I would be fired.

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (356) 1 year ago

One misplaced card and program would dump. Then you had to try again after figuring out what happened. Lot of late nights. First large company I worked at had 50-60 punch card operators. What a racket in that room!

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

By the time I started as a "runner" messenger, we had one "key punch operator" left and she was a magician. I'm sure there were many more over at the larger companies I "ran" to.

But mainly we had Mag tape with data that I ran through the streets in the trunk and delivered.

Soon everything was transmitted and the runner job disappeared, by then I was a 3rd shift computer operator.

Good times.